ruce,
> The oid counter is preserved with -o on reload. It is > not reset.
I'll let you and Tom duke this one out. :-) It's all
beyond me.
> > 2. When OID's "wrap around" does the whole database
go > > kablooie? If so, why hasn't it happened to anyone
yet? > If > > not, can you describe the system PGSQL uses to
allocate > OIDs > > once it gets to 2,147,xxx,xxx? > > oid's start getting re-used on wraparound. >
This is what I mean. Does the DB engine only recycle *unused* OIDs (that is, does it check for teh continued
existanceof a tuple with OID 198401)? If that's the method, then there isn't really a problem even if I do
use OIDs as a primary index. None of my OIDs still in use
will be touched.
If OIDs start getting re-used regardless if they are
already present, then, like Tom says, it's Ragnarok. But it
seems like somebody would have increased the OID to INT8 if
that were a prospect.
-Josh Berkus
P.S. Bruce, I'm sorry about not sending my comments on
your book. Do you have any use for copy-editing comments from the June 28th version, or are you already in
pre-press?
