| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb(at)eskimo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bo Lorentsen <bl(at)netgroup(dot)dk>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Using oids |
| Date: | 2003-09-03 21:32:27 |
| Message-ID: | 14686.1062624747@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb(at)eskimo(dot)com> writes:
>>> If you want a globally unique ID based on OIDs, use the table OID
>>> concatenated with the row OID.
>> Ok, this make sense !
> Are you sure this works after you hit the 4 billion mark?
If you have a unique index on OID on each table for which you care, yes.
As someone else pointed out, you do then have to cope with the
possibility of insertions failing because of OID conflicts.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adam Kavan | 2003-09-03 21:34:22 | Re: Index not being used ? |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-09-03 21:30:39 | Re: pg_autovacuum |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Darcy Buskermolen | 2003-09-03 21:44:21 | Re: Transaction status in default psql prompt? |
| Previous Message | Bo Lorentsen | 2003-09-03 21:28:33 | Re: Using oids |