(2012/02/27 12:35), Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Thom Brownt...@linux.com wrote:
If there seems to be a consensus on removing system column from foreign
tables, I'd like to work on this issue. Attached is a halfway patch,
and ISTM there is no problem so far.
I can
2012/2/28 Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com:
(2012/02/27 12:35), Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Thom Brownt...@linux.com wrote:
If there seems to be a consensus on removing system column from foreign
tables, I'd like to work on this issue. Attached is a halfway
(2012/02/28 18:08), Thom Brown wrote:
If that's something that will likely be introduced in future, then
surely we'd want to keep the tableoid column rather than removing it
then re-introducing it later?
As background knowledge, currently (9.1 and 9.2dev) foreign tables have
all system
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Shigeru Hanada
shigeru.han...@gmail.com wrote:
We have three options:
a) remove all system columns (posted patch)
b) remove system columns other than tableoid
c) leave all system columns as is (current 9.2dev)
Incidentally, views, which is very similar
2012年2月28日12:00 Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com:
(2012/02/28 18:08), Thom Brown wrote:
If that's something that will likely be introduced in future, then
surely we'd want to keep the tableoid column rather than removing it
then re-introducing it later?
As background knowledge,
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Shigeru Hanada
shigeru.han...@gmail.com wrote:
We have three options:
a) remove all system columns (posted patch)
b) remove system columns other than tableoid
c) leave all system columns as is (current 9.2dev)
(2012/02/28 23:37), Kohei KaiGai wrote:
2012年2月28日12:00 Shigeru Hanadashigeru.han...@gmail.com:
We have three options:
a) remove all system columns (posted patch)
b) remove system columns other than tableoid
c) leave all system columns as is (current 9.2dev)
Incidentally, views, which is
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
If there seems to be a consensus on removing system column from foreign
tables, I'd like to work on this issue. Attached is a halfway patch,
and ISTM there is no problem so far.
I can say that at least PgAdmin doesn't use
On 14 November 2011 13:07, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
2011/11/14 Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com
(2011/11/14 11:25), Robert Haas wrote:
My vote is to nuke 'em all. :-)
+1.
IIRC, main purpose of supporting tableoid for foreign tables was to be
basis of foreign table
(2011/11/14 11:25), Robert Haas wrote:
My vote is to nuke 'em all. :-)
+1.
IIRC, main purpose of supporting tableoid for foreign tables was to be
basis of foreign table inheritance, which was not included in 9.1, and
we have not supported it yet. Other system columns are essentially
garbage,
2011/11/14 Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com
(2011/11/14 11:25), Robert Haas wrote:
My vote is to nuke 'em all. :-)
+1.
IIRC, main purpose of supporting tableoid for foreign tables was to be
basis of foreign table inheritance, which was not included in 9.1, and
we have not
On sön, 2011-11-13 at 00:58 +, Thom Brown wrote:
Is there a cost to having them there? Could there be tools that might
break if the columns were no longer available?
Doubtful. Views don't have system columns either.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
On Nov13, 2011, at 01:38 , Tom Lane wrote:
Just a couple hours ago I was wondering why we create system columns for
foreign tables at all. Is there a reasonable prospect that they'll ever
be useful? I can see potential value in tableoid, but the others seem
pretty dubious --- even if you
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
On Nov13, 2011, at 01:38 , Tom Lane wrote:
Just a couple hours ago I was wondering why we create system columns for
foreign tables at all. Is there a reasonable prospect that they'll ever
be useful? I can see potential value
I notice that there's some weird info coming out of the system columns
on any FDW:
test=# select tableoid, ctid, xmin, xmax, cmin, cmax, * from dict limit 12;
tableoid | ctid | xmin |xmax| cmin | cmax | words
Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
So the ctid is always 2^32-1. Bit weird, but probably explainable.
See ItemPointerSetInvalid.
But xmin on the file_fdw result is odd. Why are these all over the
place?
heap_form_tuple initializes the t_choice fields as though for a tuple
Datum, and
On 13 November 2011 00:38, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
But xmin on the file_fdw result is odd. Why are these all over the
place?
heap_form_tuple initializes the t_choice fields as though for a tuple
Datum, and file_fdw doesn't change it.
Just a
17 matches
Mail list logo
