| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: removing datlastsysoid |
| Date: | 2022-05-16 14:26:17 |
| Message-ID: | 1319921.1652711177@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Mon, 16 May 2022 at 15:06, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> wrote:
>> Out solution was to use the constant:
>>
>> #define FirstNormalObjectId 16384
>>
>> And treat anything below that as a system oid. This constant has not
>> changed in a very long time (if ever) but we added it to our list of
>> constants to recheck with each release.
> Yes, that seems reasonable. Changing that value would very likely break
> pg_upgrade I can imagine, so I suspect it'll stay as it is for a while
> longer.
Yeah, raising that would be extremely painful for pg_upgrade.
I think that when we approach the point where the system OID range
is saturated, we'll give up the principle of system OIDs being
globally unique instead of doing that. There's no fundamental
reason why unique-per-catalog wouldn't be good enough, and letting
that be the standard would give us many more years of breathing room.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2022-05-16 14:37:45 | Re: removing datlastsysoid |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-05-16 14:18:27 | Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes |