Re: Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal
Date: 2001-08-02 21:25:51
Message-ID: 3B69C55F.CFC06DF5@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

mlw wrote:
>
> I posted this question earlier, but it looks like it never made it on.
>
> If you can control the OIDs on a per table basis, and some tables need not even
> have any, why not let each table have its own OID range? Essentially, each
> record will be numbered relative to 0 on its table?
>
> That would really cut down the OID wrap around problem, and allow records to
> have a notion of serialization.

What would the meaning of such an "OID" be ?

Apart from duplicating the primary key that is ?

------------------
Hannu

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-08-02 21:32:20 Re: Revised Patch to allow multiple table locks in "Unison"
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2001-08-02 21:19:04 Re: Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal