>There's been a very recent change to include the OID in certain names
>in the system table. Do a "select * from pg_amop;" to see what I
>mean: the values for amopselect and amopnpages didn't have the OID
>appended before. Was this change intentional? If so, I'm really
>curious as to why... And what's the best way to find out, from SQL,
>that 'btreesel' should now be 'btreesel_1268'?
Yes, I don't like this change either. If the oid is needed it should be in a second field,
and the unique index should be ( name, theoid )
Andreas
--ELM906585503-11559-0_
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="/tmp/a5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit