Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?
От | John Naylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CACPNZCsHdcQN2jQ1=ptbi1Co2Nj3aHgRCUMk62=ThgWNabPY+Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions? (John Naylor <john.naylor@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?
Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote: > On 2/8/19, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> A script such as you suggest might be a good way to reduce the temptation >> to get lazy at the last minute. Now that the catalog data is pretty >> machine-readable, I suspect it wouldn't be very hard --- though I'm >> not volunteering either. I'm envisioning something simple like "renumber >> all OIDs in range mmmm-nnnn into range xxxx-yyyy", perhaps with the >> ability to skip any already-used OIDs in the target range. > > This might be something that can be done inside reformat_dat_files.pl. > It's a little outside it's scope, but better than the alternatives. Along those lines, here's a draft patch to do just that. It handles array type oids as well. Run it like this: perl reformat_dat_file.pl --map-from 9000 --map-to 2000 *.dat There is some attempt at documentation. So far it doesn't map by default, but that could be changed if we agreed on the convention of 9000 or whatever. -- John Naylor https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: