-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> It occurs to me that without the explicit entries, we could stop > considering the system names to be reserved column names --- that is, > we could allow users to create ordinary columns by these names. > (The procedure for looking up a column name would be to first try in > pg_attribute, and if that failed to check an internal list of system > column names.) If you did make such a column, then you'd be unable to > get at the system column you'd masked in that particular table. I'm > unsure offhand if this would be a good thing or bad. This sounds bad to me. Maybe not for things like cmin and cmax, but I use ctid a lot, and would be quite thrown off if a table suddenly were allowed to create it's own ctid column that did not behave as the current one does. Perhaps if it was called "pg_ctid?" 1/2 :) - -- Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200502211318 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFCGiY0vJuQZxSWSsgRArjHAKDRsZ47E52fgJXDPPe5SUPoy7mqhACfY9eW QJXKFq0ZTIBnXtodNqXDZig= =kdBu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
