-----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 greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200502211318
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFCGiY0vJuQZxSWSsgRArjHAKDRsZ47E52fgJXDPPe5SUPoy7mqhACfY9eW
QJXKFq0ZTIBnXtodNqXDZig=
=kdBu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
