Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade
Date: 2003-12-15 02:41:50
Message-ID: 3FDD1F6E.5030100@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> No. The proposed pg_upgrade procedure doesn't try to reproduce OIDs of
> catalog entries (other than toast-table OIDs, which are never
> preassigned anyway), so there's no issue.
>
> Good point though --- thanks for thinking about it.

What about cached OIDs in view and function definitions, etc...?

Like if someone had a view that used the old oidrand() function and now
we reused that oid for a new, completely different function, would
breakage occur?

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2003-12-15 02:44:55 Re: ORDER BY and DISTINCT ON
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-12-15 02:29:59 Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade