Re: obj_unique_identifier(oid)

Joel Jacobson <joel@gluefinance.com>

From: Joel Jacobson <joel@gluefinance.com>

To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>, Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>, Herrera Alvaro <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2011-01-08T21:21:53Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Add pg_describe_object function
- 6cc2deb86e91 9.1.0 cited

2011/1/8 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>:
> I don't think your analysis is correct.  Each entry in pg_depend
> represents the fact that one object depends on another object, and an
> object could easily depend on more than one other object, or be
> depended upon by more than one other object, or depend on one object
> and be depended on by another.

What does that have to do with this?

Two different oids represents two different objects, right?
Two different objects should have two different descriptions, right?
Otherwise I cannot see how one can argue the description being unique.

The pg_describe_object returns unique descriptions for all object
types, except for the 5 types I unexpectedly found.