Re: Pro et contra of preserving pg_proc oids during pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: Pro et contra of preserving pg_proc oids during pg_upgrade
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbfxjt6YjkCm0PDp+q+7gMhYPCs5sGsA7cRhELRk92Trg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Pro et contra of preserving pg_proc oids during pg_upgrade  (Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Pro et contra of preserving pg_proc oids during pg_upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 1:31 PM Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc@gmail.com> wrote:
About using surrogate key - this feature is more for data generated by
the DBMS itself, i.e. data processed by some extension and saved
and re-processed automatically or by user's request, but without bothering
user with these internal keys.

Then what does it matter whether you spell it:

12345
or
my_ext.do_something(int)
?

Why do you require us to redefine the scope for which pg_proc.oid is useful in order to implement this behavior?

Your extension breaks if your user uses logical backups or we otherwise get into a position where pg_upgrade cannot be used to migrate in the future.  Is avoiding the textual representation so necessary that you need to add another dependency to the system?  That just seems unwise regardless of how easy it may be to accomplish.

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nikita Malakhov
Date:
Subject: Re: Pro et contra of preserving pg_proc oids during pg_upgrade
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarify the behavior of the system when approaching XID wraparound