Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Tom Lane <[email protected]> writes: > > We could stop doing that > > once we have all the user tables in place --- I don't believe it's > > necessary to preserve the OIDs of user indexes. But we need to > > preserve toast table OIDs, and toast table index OIDs too if those > > are created at the same time they are now (else we risk one of them > > colliding with a toast table OID we want to create later). > > It seems harder to come up with a general purpose syntax to support the > feature in case of toast tables, though.
There's already general purpose syntax for relation options which can be used to get options that do not ultimately end up in pg_class.reloptions. An existing example is WITH (oids). One such option could be used here. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
