Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> I guess I should know better than to jump to a conclusion. But I *was*
> under the impression we were supposed to use the unused_oids script to
> get a unique oid for a new function.
Right, we do still insist that all hand-assigned OIDs be distinct, but
that is a matter of bookkeeping simplicity and possible debugging
advantage. The system should only care that the OIDs in any one catalog
are unique. (If it were to assume more, we'd have trouble after OID
wraparound, because we can't guarantee database-wide uniqueness then.
We *can* guarantee per-table uniqueness, by means of unique indexes
placed on OIDs --- you'll notice all the catalogs that use OIDs have
such indexes.)
> Actually, I don't see the regression failure here at all, now that I try
> the patch.
Hmm. Maybe Chris just needs a make clean/rebuild/etc?
regards, tom lane