On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>> This doesn't strike me as very good advice. Those things are not exposed
>>> generally for good reason. The right way to do this surely is to have the
>>> app look up and cache the OIDs it needs rather than hardcode the values in
>>> the application.
>
>> Note he didn't provide reasons why he is asking for this power. Your
>> assertion is a coded variant of "don't use the binary protocol" which
>> I happen to think is not very good advice IF you know what you're
>> doing.
>
> Say what? He didn't say that, he said "don't assume that user-defined
> types have hard-wired OIDs".
Well, you're right, strictly speaking. Of course, the OP is not
assuming it, he is enforcing it. And I still think this is a proxy
argument about binary protocol features.
merlin
(Andrew's advice is of course prudent, and should certainly by
typically taken before mine) :-D