Re: Translation of the NextOID message in pg_controldata

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Translation of the NextOID message in pg_controldata
Date: 2026-09-14 19:01:27
Message-ID: c86afb31-3250-4400-9b10-1e67f4eb5c1a@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 14.09.26 09:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2026 at 08:41:59AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I'm not sure I understand why we care that we hardcode that Oid8 is the
>> same as uint64. It's never been a problem that Oid is the same as uin32 ...
>
> For me, the reason is greppability of oid8 information as the
> variables printed in the strings may not refer to variables declared
> in the code.

I don't understand what this means. Do you mean you want to grep for
where an oid8 value is being printed? I mean, that just won't work. We
don't accommodate that in the code for anything else in place of "oid8".

I think the symbol OID8_FORMAT should be purged from the code. Its
presence is just going to cause confusion, with people using it in
incorrect ways, and inviting more XXX_FORMAT symbols to be added. We
have just been working on getting rid of these after all.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Burd 2026-09-14 19:02:33 Re: Trying out <stdatomic.h>
Previous Message Ayush Tiwari 2026-09-14 18:52:58 [Bug] Possible io_uring FD leak across crash recovery