Re: Solving the OID-collision problem
От | Richard Huxton |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Solving the OID-collision problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 42F9BBFC.3000704@archonet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Solving the OID-collision problem (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 16:01 +0100, Richard Huxton wrote: > >>Tom Lane wrote: >> >>>What if there aren't any "untouched chunks"? With only 64K-chunk >>>granularity, I think you'd hit that condition a lot more than you are >>>hoping. Also, this seems to assume uniqueness across all tables in an >>>entire cluster, which is much more than we want; it makes the 32-bit >>>size of OIDs significantly more worrisome than when they only need to be >>>unique within a table. >> >>Can I ask what happens if we end up re-using a recently de-allocated >>OID? Specifically, can a cached plan (e.g. plpgsql function) end up >>referring to an object created after it was planned: >> >>CREATE FUNCTION f1()... -- oid=1234 >>CREATE FUNCTION f2()... -- oid=1235, calls f1() or oid=1234 >>DROP FUNCTION f1() >>CREATE FUNCTION f3()... -- re-uses oid=1234 > > > Possible, but extremely unlikely... you'd have to keep a session open > with a prepared query for as long as it takes to create a 4 billion > tables... not a high priority case, eh? Ah, but it does rule out the possibility of keeping a cache of "recently de-allocated" OIDs and re-using those. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: