Re: Proposal: OID wraparound: summary and proposal

At 11:22 AM -0400 8/7/01, Tom Lane wrote:
>Neil Tiffin <ntiffin@earthlink.net> writes:
>>  I have not even considered multiple database servers running
>>  different database, which is our design goal.  In this case we would
>>  like to have a slimmed down (and blazingly fast) PostgreSQL server in
>>  which we manage the uid in our middleware.  This is because the uid
>>  must be unique accross all servers and database vendors.
>
>Given those requirements, it seems like your UID *must* be an
>application-defined column; there's no way you'll get a bunch of
>different database vendors to all sign on to your approach to UIDs.
>
>So in reality, I think the feature you want is precisely to be able
>to suppress Postgres' automatic OID generation on your table(s), since
>it's of no value to you.  The number of cycles saved per insert isn't
>going to be all that large, but they'll add up...

That sounds about right.  Its amazing how having to write this stuff 
down clarifies ones thoughts.

-- 
Neil
neilt@gnue.org
GNU Enterprise
http://www.gnuenterprise.org/
http://www.gnuenterprise.org/~neilt/sc.html