> Strangely enough, I've seen no objection to optional OIDs > other than mine. Probably it was my mistake to have formulated > a plan on the flimsy assumption.
I for one am more concerned about adding additional per tuple overhead (moving from 32 -> 64bit) than loosing OID's on some large tables. Imho optional OID's is the best way to combine both worlds. OID's only where you absolutely need them, and thus a good chance that wraparound does not happen during the lifetime of one application. (And all this by reducing overhead, and not adding overhead :-) Andreas ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html