Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"
Date: 2019-09-04 09:43:15
Message-ID: 20190904094315.ii2nyoxaum2vhvuw@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Hi,

On 2019-08-30 22:44:53 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 12:35:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > > Hmm. I wonder if this item really belongs in the release notes at all.
> > > My view is that this was interim policy, not necessarily a permanent
> > > thing; and it's oriented strictly towards PG developers rather than end
> > > users or even fork-developers.
> >
> > I think it's the sort of thing that we sometimes cover in the
> > "source code" changes of the release notes. But yeah, 09568ec3d's
> > idea was pretty much fully superseded by a6417078c, so if we're
> > going to document anything it should be the latter not the former.
>
> OK, sure. I was just basing the release notes on this commit text:
>
> Add a note suggesting that oids in forks should be assigned in the
> 9000-9999 range.

But how do you get from forks in that sentence from the commit message
(or the source, which says " with 9000-9999 tentatively reserved for
forks"), to the range being for "external extensions"? Those are very
different things imo?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Doc comments form 2019-09-04 13:12:35 uniqueness and null could benefit from a hint for dba
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-09-04 09:40:55 Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"