On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:39 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> This looks like a pretty good analysis to me. As it relates to the
> question about allowing users to specify an OID, I'd be inclined to
> allow it but only for OIDs >64k. We've certainly reserved things in the
> past and I don't see any issue with having that reservation here, but if
> we're going to build the capability to specify the OID into CREATE
> DATABASE then it seems a bit odd to disallow users from using it, as
> long as we're preventing them from causing problems with it.
>
> Are there issues that you see with allowing users to specify the OID
> even with the >64k restriction..? I can't think of one offhand but
> perhaps I'm missing something.
So I actually should have said 16k here, not 64k, as somebody already
pointed out to me off-list. Whee!
I don't know of a reason not to let people do that, other than that it
seems like an attractive nuisance. People will do it and it will fail
because they chose a duplicate OID, or they'll complain that a regular
dump and restore didn't preserve their database OIDs, or maybe they'll
expect that they can copy a database from one cluster to another
because they gave it the same OID! That said, I don't see a great harm
in it. It just seems to me like exposing knobs to users that don't
seem to have any legitimate use may be borrowing trouble.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
