On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:48 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> Why choosing a random position within [8000,9999]? This leads to the
> following messages for example with multiple runs, which is confusing:
> Suggested random unused OID: 9473 (527 consecutive OID(s) available
> Suggested random unused OID: 8159 (31 consecutive OID(s) available
> Suggested random unused OID: 9491 (509 consecutive OID(s) available
>
> Wouldn't it be better to choose the lowest position in the development
> range, and then adapt the suggestion based on that?
No, it wouldn't. The entire point of suggesting a totally random OID
is that it minimizes the probability of a collision among concurrently
developed patches, per the policy established by commit a6417078 --
what you suggest would defeat the very purpose of this patch. In fact,
having everybody see the same suggestion from unused_oids would
*maximize* the number of OID collisions.
> We could
> recommend the range if there are at least 10 OIDs available in the
> range from the lowest position, and there are few patches eating more
> than 5-10 OIDs at once.
That sounds like an over-engineered solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
--
Peter Geoghegan