Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob=sKD=Ag3TXQ+b7wWiJaoYaV-AgEddQYCxMNMCqmz=bA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate
Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 10:01 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> > Also, I'd be inclined to reject system-provided objects by checking
> > for OID >= 16384 rather than hard-wiring assumptions about things
> > being in pg_catalog or not.
>
> To me, oid>=16384 seems more hard-wired than namespace!='pg_catalog'.

Extensions can be installed into pg_catalog, but they can't get
low-numbered OIDs.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: James Coleman
Date:
Subject: Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate