On 4/7/15 10:58 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Why not just create a sequence? I suspect it may not be as fast to assign as
an OID, but it's not like you'd be doing this all the time.
What does that have to do with the thread?
The original bit was...
And finally I have issue with how the new identifiers are allocated.
Currently, if you create identifier 'foo', remove identifier 'foo' and
create identifier 'bar', the identifier 'bar' will have same id as the old
'foo' identifier. This can be problem because the identifier id is used as
origin of the data and the replication solution using the replication
identifiers can end up thinking that data came from node 'bar' even though
they came from the node 'foo' which no longer exists. This can have bad
effects for example on conflict detection or debugging problems with
replication.
Maybe another reason to use standard Oids?
Wasn't the reason for using OIDs so that we're not doing the equivalent
of max(identifier) + 1?
Perhaps I'm just confused...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
