RE: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mikheev, Vadim
Subject RE: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend)
Date
Msg-id 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E320166DD@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Yes, nowhere near, and yes.  Sequence objects require disk I/O to
> update; the OID counter essentially lives in shared memory, and can
> be bumped for the price of a spinlock access.

Sequences also cache values (32 afair) - ie one log record is required
for 32 nextval-s. Sequence' data file is updated at checkpoint time,
so - not so much IO. I really think that using sequences for system
tables IDs would be good.

Vadim


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: J-P Guy
Date:
Subject: Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend)
Next
From: Mark Volpe
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions