Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Say what? He didn't say that, he said "don't assume that user-defined >> types have hard-wired OIDs".
> Well, you're right, strictly speaking. Of course, the OP is not > assuming it, he is enforcing it. No, he's wishing he could enforce it. Which will work, mostly, until the day it doesn't because of a pre-existing collision. And then he'll be up the creek with a lot of software that he can't fix readily. I concur with Andrew's advice: don't go there in the first place. Use a cache to mitigate the costs of looking up user-defined OIDs, and you won't regret it later. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers