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

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От John Naylor
Тема Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?
Дата
Msg-id CACPNZCv5BRuF-_SG7ZKWDZ1VmkdPGO9oqohNF=RZixUajDfdFQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?  (John Naylor <john.naylor@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2/8/19, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> A script such as you suggest might be a good way to reduce the temptation
> to get lazy at the last minute.  Now that the catalog data is pretty
> machine-readable, I suspect it wouldn't be very hard --- though I'm
> not volunteering either.  I'm envisioning something simple like "renumber
> all OIDs in range mmmm-nnnn into range xxxx-yyyy", perhaps with the
> ability to skip any already-used OIDs in the target range.

This might be something that can be done inside reformat_dat_files.pl.
It's a little outside it's scope, but better than the alternatives.
And we already have a function in Catalog.pm to get the currently used
oids. I'll volunteer to look into it but I don't know when that will
be.

-- 
John Naylor                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start
Следующее
От: Ashutosh Sharma
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: ON SELECT rule on a table without columns