> -Original Message-
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 2:37 AM
> To: Henshall, Stuart - WCP
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] RE: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend)
>
> "Henshall
"Henshall, Stuart - WCP" wrote:
>
> Would it be possible to offer an option for the OID column to get its value
> from an int4 primary key (settable on a per table basis maybe)?
> - Stuart
>
Sorry I don't understand well what you mean.
What kind of advantages are there if we let OIDs be optional
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lamar Owen) wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> [trimmed cc:list]
> On Wednesday 18 July 2001 17:09, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > OK, we need to vote on whether Oid's are optional, and whether we can
> > have them not created by default.
>
> [All the below IMHO]
Would it be possible to offer an option for the OID column to get its value
from an int4 primary key (settable on a per table basis maybe)?
- Stuart
> -Original Message-
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 7:31 AM
> To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB
>
Tom Lane wrote:
> >> What's wrong with 64-bit oids (except extra 4bytes)?
>
> > Portability, mostly.
>
> Oh, there's one other small problem: breaking the on-the-wire protocol.
So 8-byte-OID is for PostgreSQL 8? :-)
--
Alessio F. Bragadini[EMAIL PROTECTED]
APL Financial Services
On Thursday 19 July 2001 06:08, you wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it should be off on user tables by default, but kept on system
> tables just for completeness. It could be added at table creation time
> or from ALTER TABLEL ADD. It seems we just use them too m
At 06:10 PM 18-07-2001 -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
>applications :-) I guess I'll just need to switch to proper SERIALs and
>PRIMARY KEYs. Of course, if I wanted to be stubborn, I'd just use the GUC
>option to enable OIDs system-wide by default
The default 32 bit serial primary key isn't
