Re: Replacing pg_depend PIN entries with a fixed range check

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Replacing pg_depend PIN entries with a fixed range check
Date: 2021-05-12 22:20:59
Message-ID: 1363425.1620858059@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> In view of the discussion at [1], there's more pressure on the OID supply
> above 10K than I'd realized. While I don't have any good ideas about
> eliminating the problem altogether, I did have a thought that would remove
> the extra buffer zone created by my first-draft patch in this thread.
> Namely, let's have genbki.pl write out its final OID assignment counter
> value in a command in the postgres.bki file, say "set_next_oid 12036".
> This would cause the bootstrap backend to set the server's OID counter to
> that value. Then the initial part of initdb's post-bootstrap processing
> could assign pinned OIDs working forward from there, with no gap. We'd
> still need a gap before FirstBootstrapObjectId (which we might as well
> rename to FirstUnpinnedObjectId), but we don't need two gaps, and so this
> patch wouldn't make things any worse than they are today.

Here's a v2 that does things that way (and is rebased up to HEAD).
I did some more documentation cleanup, too.

regards, tom lane

Attachment Content-Type Size
remove-pg_depend-PIN-entries-2.patch text/x-diff 56.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-05-12 23:19:27 Re: AlterSubscription_refresh "wrconn" wrong variable?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-05-12 22:19:28 Re: PG 14 release notes, first draft