I don't know why they use OID's for cursors. But I do know that if you run a trace the SQL that creates the cursor uses OID's, so it doesn't work if the table is created without OID's. Also, if you want to have updateable cursors against views (i.e., a view with rules for INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE), you must name the OID and CTID as columns in the view. Again, we learned this the hard way. Mark Dexter
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:06 PM To: Mark Dexter Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: disabling OIDs? "Mark Dexter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > For what it's worth, OIDs are required if you ever want to use > > updateable cursors with the ODBC driver. We discovered this the > > hard way. Mark Dexter That's unfortunate. Is it because it's difficult to track down the primary key of the table? Is it any easier to track down the primary key of the table in 8.0? It would be much better if it checked the primary key and used that instead of OIDs. Though I'm unclear implementing "updateable cursors" in the client-end is really a good idea. I suppose it's nice if you understand the limitations inherent. -- greg ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
