From: David Hartwig <daveh@insightdist.com>
To: Peter T Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large objects names
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 09:14:44 -0400
Message-ID: <35C9AC44.91BB9A8C@insightdist.com> (raw)
References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980806065832.793I-100000@maidast.retep.org.uk>
Peter T Mount wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Currently, large objects are stored internally as xinv### and xinx###.
> >
> > I would like to rename this for 6.4 to be _lobject_### to prevent
> > namespace collisions, and make them clearer for administrators.
> >
> > However, this may cause problems for backward compatability for large
> > object users. As I see there are going to be other new large object
> > things in 6.4, it may not be an issue.
> >
> > Is is OK to rename them internally?
>
> Shouldn't be a problem. JDBC does refer to the xin prefix with the
> getTables method, so it's simply a single change there.
>
The same goes for ODBC.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: daveh@insightdist.com, peter@retep.org.uk, maillist@candle.pha.pa.us, hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large objects names
In-Reply-To: <35C9AC44.91BB9A8C@insightdist.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox