Re: [GENERAL] Re: Thought on OIDs

[Rod Taylor]

I use XID's regularly now for historical purposes (delayed reversion
of entire operations -- handled by an interface of course where
appropriate) but OID's I could certainly live without.  However, PHP
currently returns the OID in from pg_getlastoid() which I use to
select from the table the last PRIMARY KEY entry.  Getting this key
before sometimes isn't an option (triggers handle them sometimes).  If
I could have a pg_getlastprimarykey() function which returns a hash of
name / value pairs of the new key without using the OID it would be
ideal.

--
Rod Taylor

There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the
truth, and what really happened.
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Eisentraut" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Rod Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: Thought on OIDs


 Rod Taylor writes:

  Someones bound to hit it in a year or 2 as Postgres is getting
pretty
  good for large projects as well as the small, especially with
7.1's
  speed enhancements.  Hopefully 7.2 will create cycling OIDs and
XIDs.
  Then less problems in 'unlimited' extendability.

 The easiest approach for OIDs will probably be making them optional
in the
 first place.  For the vast majority of users, the OIDs are just
wasting
 space.

 The cycling XID idea is based on the assertion that eventually all
 transactions will be closed, at which time a record is either known
 committed or known dead so that the XID can be recycled.  For OIDs,
this
 is not practical.  And if you wanted OIDs that automatically fill in
the
 holes, that's probably not realistic.

 --
 Peter Eisentraut  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://yi.org/peter-e/


 ---(end of
broadcast)---
 TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
 subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
 message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Re: [GENERAL] Re: Thought on OIDs

[adb]

I personally would like to see 8byte OIDs or at least int8 sequences,  I'm
a little worried about the pain of managing a potential rollover when I'm 
using sequences as a replication key between servers.

Alex.

On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

 Rod Taylor writes:
 
  Someones bound to hit it in a year or 2 as Postgres is getting pretty
  good for large projects as well as the small, especially with 7.1's
  speed enhancements.  Hopefully 7.2 will create cycling OIDs and XIDs.
  Then less problems in 'unlimited' extendability.
 
 The easiest approach for OIDs will probably be making them optional in the
 first place.  For the vast majority of users, the OIDs are just wasting
 space.
 
 The cycling XID idea is based on the assertion that eventually all
 transactions will be closed, at which time a record is either known
 committed or known dead so that the XID can be recycled.  For OIDs, this
 is not practical.  And if you wanted OIDs that automatically fill in the
 holes, that's probably not realistic.
 
 -- 
 Peter Eisentraut  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://yi.org/peter-e/
 
 
 ---(end of broadcast)---
 TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
 subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
 message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
 


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])