Nathan Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 09:28:18AM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> >
> > > 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.
>
> At the same time that we announce support for optional OIDs,
> we should announce that, in future releases, OIDs will only be
> guaranteed unique (modulo wraparounds) within a single table.
What would the purpose of such an announcement be ???
OID is "Object IDentifier", meant to uniquely identify ANY object in an
Object-Relational Database ,which PostgreSQL sometimes claims itself to
be.
If they are unique only within a single table then they are just
system-supplied primary key fields without a default index - quite
useless IMHO
I hope someone takes up the task of putting back some of the
niftier features of original Postgres/postgres95 and adding more OO
features. Deprecating OIDs won't help there .
--------------------
Hannu