Re: 4 billion + oids

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 4 billion + oids
Date: 2003-03-24 19:16:48
Message-ID: 19440.1048533408@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> writes:
> I have definitely seen serious problems relating to OID wrap.
> We have an application that uses the OID's to create joins.
> We scan tables from a list of source tables from some external (usually
> non-postgresql) database.
> For each of these tables we create a 64 bit checksum for each record and
> store it in a table, along with an OID.

Why in the world aren't you using a serial int8 column, instead?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2003-03-24 19:24:29 Re: 4 billion + oids
Previous Message Andrew Sullivan 2003-03-24 18:51:06 Re: 32/64-bit transaction IDs?