| From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Get rid of system attributes in pg_attribute? |
| Date: | 2005-02-20 03:38:51 |
| Message-ID: | 200502192238.51245.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday 19 February 2005 12:17, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> >>> Does anyone know of client code that actually pays attention to
> >>> pg_attribute rows with negative attnums?
> >
> > Would those columns remain selectable for debugging/maintenance
> > purposes, despite not appearing in system catalogs?
>
> Certainly. They just wouldn't have entries in pg_attribute.
>
If I am understanding this correctly, they could only be displayed if selected
explicitly right? So any program that attempts to show all "hidden" columns
by just doing a "where attnum < 1" is going to break, correct?
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | pgsql | 2005-02-20 04:19:28 | Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around |
| Previous Message | Peter Bierman | 2005-02-20 02:43:14 | Fwd: Apple Darwin disabled fsync? |