Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal

From: ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers)
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal
Date: 2001-08-02 21:54:28
Message-ID: 20010802145428.B11669@store.zembu.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 09:28:18AM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
>
> > Strangely enough, I've seen no objection to optional OIDs
> > other than mine. Probably it was my mistake to have formulated
> > a plan on the flimsy assumption.
>
> I for one am more concerned about adding additional per
> tuple overhead (moving from 32 -> 64bit) than loosing OID's
> on some large tables. Imho optional OID's is the best way to combine
> both worlds.

At the same time that we announce support for optional OIDs,
we should announce that, in future releases, OIDs will only be
guaranteed unique (modulo wraparounds) within a single table.

Nathan Myers
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Huxton 2001-08-02 22:01:27 Re: plpgsql: RAISE <level> <expr> <params>
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-08-02 21:32:20 Re: Revised Patch to allow multiple table locks in "Unison"