On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 12:27 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > It seems to me that what this comment is saying is that OIDs in the
> > second and third categories are doled out by counters. Therefore, we
> > can't know which of those OIDs will get used, or how many of them will
> > get used, or which objects will get which OIDs. Therefore, I think we
> > should go back to the approach that you were using for template0 and
> > handle both that database and postgres using that method. That is,
> > assign an OID manually, and make sure unused_oids knows that it should
> > be counted as already used.
>
> Indeed. If you're going to manually assign OIDs to these databases,
> do it honestly, and put them into the range intended for that purpose.
> Trying to take short-cuts is just going to cause trouble down the road.
Understood. I will rework the patch accordingly. Thanks
Regards,
Shruthi KC
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com