Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:39 PM Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> The changes of a patch (a) allocating a new OID, (b) a second patch
> allocating a new OID, (c) both being in flight at the same time, (d)
> actually picking the same OID, are small.

But...they are. Most patches don't create new system catalog entries
at all. Of those that do, the conventions around assigning new OIDs
make it fairly likely that problems will emerge.

> I guess the overall time lost
> to this issue is perhaps 2 hours per year. On the other hand, with
> about 2000 commits to master per year, if this renumbering business only
> adds 2 seconds of overhead to committing, we're coming out behind.

The time spent on the final commit is not the cost we're concerned
about, though. It isn't necessary to do that more than once, whereas
all but the most trivial of patches receive multiple rounds of review
and revision.

--
Peter Geoghegan