Thanks, Tom. I guess the answer is, yes, but perhaps you can help me decide. I'm just reading this part of the documentation from the link I posted: "OIDs are not added to user-created tables, unless WITH OIDS is specified when the table is created." and also: The oid type is currently implemented as an unsigned four-byte integer. Therefore, it is not large enough to provide database-wide uniqueness in large databases, or even in large individual tables. So, using a user-created table's OID column as a primary key is discouraged. OIDs are best used only for references to system tables. Am I misinterpreting this documentation? Are there cases in which the OID's of two tables will collide? I don't see any uniqueness constraints on the pg_class table. Or are there cases in which a table does not have an OID in the pg_class table? I apologize for the dumb questions, but I'm just a little confused about the internals. Thanks, Whit On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Whit Armstrong <armstrong.whit@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> However, there is no example that uses a schema + tablename. > > If you're into masochism you can do that with a join of pg_class and > pg_namespace. But what's usually easier for one-off queries is to > use the regclass converter: > > select attname, atttypid from pg_attribute > where attrelid = 'myschema.mytable'::regclass; > > Most likely you'll also want > > ... and attnum > 0 and not attisdropped > > to keep down the clutter. > > regards, tom lane > -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
