Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes: > >> On 9/20/10 10:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >>> Backwards-compatibility? ;-) There hasn't been any pressing reason to > >>> remove it. > > > Mind you, it wouldn't take a *big* reason to persuade me to remove it. > > But bigger than that. > > Actually, I can think of a fairly sizable reason not to remove it: > pg_dump issues "SET default_with_oids" commands in its scripts, and > has done for lo these many years. So you'd be breaking backwards > compatibility with even-quite-recent dumps. > > It'd be possible to work around that; for example, if you don't use > --single-transaction to restore the dump then you could just ignore > the errors. But it still is not something to just lightly break.
Also, doesn't some SQL standard require oids, so we should have a way to enable them by default for all tables? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
