Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?
Дата
Msg-id 8406.1552409419@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?  (John Naylor <john.naylor@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
John Naylor <john.naylor@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 5:36 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> This seems committable from my end --- any further comments?

> I gave it a read and it looks good to me, but I haven't tried to run it.

Thanks for checking.  I've pushed both patches now.

I noticed while looking at the pg_class data that someone had stuck in a
hack to make genbki.pl substitute for "PGHEAPAM", which AFAICS is just
following the bad old precedent of PGNSP and PGUID.  I got rid of that
in favor of using the already-existing BKI_LOOKUP(pg_am) mechanism.
Maybe someday we should try to get rid of PGNSP and PGUID too, although
there are stumbling blocks in the way of both:

* PGNSP is also substituted for in the bodies of some SQL procedures.

* Replacing PGUID with the actual name of the bootstrap superuser is a
bit problematic because that name isn't necessarily "postgres".  We
could probably make it work, but I'm not convinced it'd be any less
confusing than the existing special-case behavior is.

Anyway I think we're basically done here.  There's some additional
cleanup that could possibly be done, like removing the hard-wired
references to OID 1 in initdb.c.  But I'm having a hard time convincing
myself that it's worth the trouble, except maybe for the question of
information_schema.sql's hard-wired type OIDs.  Even there, it's
certainly possible for a patch to use a regtype constant even if
the existing code doesn't.

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Euler Taveira
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [WIP] CREATE SUBSCRIPTION with FOR TABLES clause (table filter)
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Use nanosleep(2) in pg_usleep, if available?