Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WznEjtgrHrWWZ_NqaSspL+Dfi2O7NJj8TZUNmJqHrKXrXg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:14 AM 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. I imagined that the machine-readable catalog data would allow us to assign non-numeric identifiers to this OID range. Perhaps there'd be a textual symbol with a number in the range of 0-20 at the end. Those would stick out like a sore thumb, making it highly unlikely that anybody would forget about it at the last minute. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: