| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Jones <cjones(at)rightnowtech(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: 4 billion record limit? |
| Date: | 2000-07-28 05:46:48 |
| Message-ID: | 28547.964763208@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-novice |
Chris Jones <cjones(at)rightnowtech(dot)com> writes:
> So, assuming these numbers are reasonable, and assuming that Moore's
> Law applies to PG usage, we could have trouble with 64-bit OIDs in
> maybe 40 years.
Interesting point. However, once we bite the bullet of not tying
OID == int32, it should be relatively painless to equate OID to any
compiler-supported integer type. So we should only need to fix
this problem once. If your projection is accurate, no doubt C2020
will consider "long long long int" to be a required type ;-)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-07-28 06:12:26 | Re: 4 billion record limit? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-07-28 05:38:41 | Re: pg_dump error |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-07-28 06:12:26 | Re: 4 billion record limit? |
| Previous Message | Thomas Swan | 2000-07-28 04:47:00 | Re[2]: upgrade from 6.4 to 7.02 problem |