> 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

Reply via email to