Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs" - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"
Date
Msg-id 20190904094315.ii2nyoxaum2vhvuw@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-docs
Hi,

On 2019-08-30 22:44:53 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 12:35:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > > Hmm.  I wonder if this item really belongs in the release notes at all.
> > > My view is that this was interim policy, not necessarily a permanent
> > > thing; and it's oriented strictly towards PG developers rather than end
> > > users or even fork-developers.
> > 
> > I think it's the sort of thing that we sometimes cover in the
> > "source code" changes of the release notes.  But yeah, 09568ec3d's
> > idea was pretty much fully superseded by a6417078c, so if we're
> > going to document anything it should be the latter not the former.
> 
> OK, sure.  I was just basing the release notes on this commit text:
> 
>     Add a note suggesting that oids in forks should be assigned in the
>     9000-9999 range.

But how do you get from forks in that sentence from the commit message
(or the source, which says " with 9000-9999 tentatively reserved for
forks"), to the range being for "external extensions"? Those are very
different things imo?

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"
Next
From: PG Doc comments form
Date:
Subject: uniqueness and null could benefit from a hint for dba