OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6335.995478765@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend)
Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > Yikes, I am not sure we are ready to make oids optional. We've discussed it enough, it's time to do it. I have an ulterior plan here: I want 7.2 not to have any limitations that prevent it from being used in a true 24x7, up-forever scenario. VACUUM lockouts are fixed now, or nearly. The other stumbling blocks for continuous runs are OID wraparound and XID wraparound. We've got unique indexes on OIDs for all system catalogs that need them (we were short a couple as of 7.1, btw), but OID wrap is still likely to lead to unwanted "duplicate key" failures. So we still need a way to reduce the system's appetite for OIDs. In a configuration where OIDs are used only where *necessary*, it'd be a long time till wrap. I also intend to do something about XID wrap next month... > Do we return unused oids back to the pool on backend exit yet? Since WAL, and that was never a fundamental answer anyway. > Will we have cheap 64-bit oids by the time oid wraparound becomes an > issue? No, we won't, because OID wrap is an issue already for any long-uptime installation. (64-bit XIDs are not a real practical answer either, btw.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: