Re: Concrete proposal for large objects and MVCC

>>This avoids the risk of creating any serious backwards-compatibility
>>issues: if there's anyone out there who does need SnapshotNow reads,
>>they just have to be sure to open the LO in read-write mode to have
>>fully backward compatible operation.
>>
>>Comments, objections?
>
>
> Besides the MVCC issue, I am not sure it's a good idea LO being binded
> to OID. In my understanding OID is solely used to distinguish each LO
> in a database. In another word, it's just a key to LO. I think giving
> explicit key when creating a LO has some benefits:
>
> 1) not need to worry about OID wrap around problem
> 2) easier to find orpahn LO
> 3) for replication systems it's easier to replicate LOs
4) No longer tied to a system object and thus no oddities needed for
backup/restore.

It should just be an int4 or in8 with a serial IMHO.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> What do you think?
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/