Re: [HACKERS] NUMERIC needs OID's

> > The problem is that we don't have a range of 30 left anymore, and the
> > needs of future development are surely going to eat up the rest. One
> > idea is to remove some of the conversion functions we have defined
> > that are rarely used. We don't NEED them with Thomas's conversion
> > stuff. Thomas says native conversion is faster, but if we find some
> > that we almost never use, we could rip them out and use those.
>
> That won't get us very many OIDs, so doesn't solve the problem in the
> long run.
>
> > However, my recommendation is that we have to start thinking about
> > increasing the maximum allowable system oid.
> > The max system oid is stored in transam.h as:
> > #define BootstrapObjectIdData 16384

I am a dope. The first user oid is 16k, and unused_oids says:

$ unused_oids
1 - 10
100 - 101
754
842
949
1288 - 1295
1597 - 1599
1608 - 1610
1619 - 1639
1644 -

There is nothing magical about 1644. We have always been packing the
oids into that range, while we have never used oids over 1644. Just
start at 1650 and head toward 16384. We have roughly 16200 unused
system oids left.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026