Re: OID Overflow for large objects
От | Jeff Boes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: OID Overflow for large objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 40A0ED12.70101@nexcerpt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: OID Overflow for large objects (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
Tom Lane wrote: >>(http://www3.sk.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html): >> >> >>OIDs are stored as 4-byte integers, and will overflow at 4 billion. No >>one has reported this ever happening, and we plan to have the limit >>removed before anyone does. >> >> > >That comment in the FAQ seems quite out-of-date. > >What will actually happen is that the OID generator will wrap around. >This will not bother Postgres particularly, but you may start having >occasional transaction failures due to duplicate OIDs --- for example, >I believe lo_create will fail if the OID it selects already exists in >pg_largeobject. > > > Pardon my incredulity, but doesn't that seem like a bug? Or at least a limitation? Does this mean that the effective useful lifetime of pg_largeobject is only as long as it takes to wrap around, after which you *must* dump and reload to prevent problems like this? (I realize this is pretty much the same issue as having a sequence number on a table, but if I'm interpreting all this correctly, the OID wrap-around is going to occur a lot sooner than my table sequence number wrap-around.) -- Jeff Boes vox 269.226.9550 ext 24 Database Engineer fax 269.349.9076 Nexcerpt, Inc. http://www.nexcerpt.com ...Nexcerpt... Extend your Expertise
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: