On 2/9/09, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2/9/09, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> writes: > >> > But now that I learned that ALTER TABLE WITHOUT OIDS either causes bugs > >> > or requires table rewrite, it turned from minor annoyance to big > annoyance. > >> > So I'd like have a reasonable path for getting rid of them, which we > don't > >> > have currently. > >> > >> We've had SET WITHOUT OIDS since 7.3 or thereabouts. Anybody who hasn't > >> applied it in all that time either does not care, or actually needs the > >> OIDs and will be unhappy if we arbitrarily remove the feature. > > > > Sure I did not care. Because I thought I can get rid of them > > anytime I wanted. But it seems it's not the case... > > > > We've set default_with_oids = false, for quite a long time. But there > > are still tables remaining with oids. And this discussion showed it > > now easy to get rid of them. > > > > I can patch Postgres myself, but I was thinking maybe others want also > > some solution. > > > I must be missing something. Why would you need to patch PostgreSQL > and how would it help you if you did?
We use dumps to move db's around and they contain lot of SET default_with_oids that the pg_dump happily puts there. Remembering to filter them out each time a database is created does not work. So it would be good if we can use such dump, but receiving Postgres would ignore any requests to create tables with oids. -- marko -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
