From: | Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: DISABLE TRIGGER doc wrong? |
Date: | 2025-08-26 13:08:35 |
Message-ID: | CANzqJaA_UfXQZoEu7bh6=khERBUixJOAj2SscMua-uv=uFSxeg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 9:01 AM Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 2:54 PM Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 3:01 AM Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> ERROR: permission denied: "RI_ConstraintTrigger_c_1226298044" is a
> >> (yes, that's a large OID... For a 1 year old DB)
> >
> > PG's OID allocation of "user-land" OIDs doesn't start at 16384 anymore.
>
> This is a 17 cluster. So not even 1 year old then.
> So getting to 1.2B OIDs in 10 months,
> doesn't bode well for the longevity of that cluster.
> But we're getting OT here.
> This is not a "production" server, lots of CIs and manual testing there.
>
Like I said, it's not completely linear. The real question, though, is
whether PG looks for gaps in oid allocation once it wants to try and
allocate an oid of uint32 max.
I bet it does. If it doesn't... pg_dump/pg_restore, baby!
--
Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce.
Don't boil me, I'm still alive.
<Redacted> lobster!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | xx Z | 2025-08-26 13:09:36 | Re: Feature request: A method to configure client-side TLS ciphers for streaming replication |
Previous Message | Dominique Devienne | 2025-08-26 13:01:16 | Re: DISABLE TRIGGER doc wrong? |