Greetings, * Thomas Munro (thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com) wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 11:35 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > > Does anybody have engineering / architecture level comments about this > > > proposal? > > > > FWIW, I'm -1 on making OIDs be not-magic for SELECT purposes. Yeah, it's > > a wart we wouldn't have if we designed the system today, but the wart is > > thirty years old. I think changing that will break so many catalog > > queries that we'll have the villagers on the doorstep. Most of the other > > things you're suggesting here could be done easily without making that > > change. > > > > Possibly we could make them not-magic from the storage standpoint (ie > > they're regular columns) but have a pg_attribute flag that says not > > to include them in "SELECT *" expansion. > > FWIW there is interest in a general facility for hiding arbitrary > attributes from SELECT * for other reasons too: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEepm%3D3ZHh%3Dp0nEEnVbs1Dig_UShPzHUcMNAqvDQUgYgcDo-pA%40mail.gmail.com
Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking to bring up also. There's certainly also been explicit requests for the user to be able to control what SELECT * means, beyond our own ideas of things we'd like to be able to add and then hide. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
