Re: Solving the OID-collision problem

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Solving the OID-collision problem
Date: 2005-08-09 15:01:14
Message-ID: 42F8C53A.5030306@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> What if there aren't any "untouched chunks"? With only 64K-chunk
> granularity, I think you'd hit that condition a lot more than you are
> hoping. Also, this seems to assume uniqueness across all tables in an
> entire cluster, which is much more than we want; it makes the 32-bit
> size of OIDs significantly more worrisome than when they only need to be
> unique within a table.

Can I ask what happens if we end up re-using a recently de-allocated
OID? Specifically, can a cached plan (e.g. plpgsql function) end up
referring to an object created after it was planned:

CREATE FUNCTION f1()... -- oid=1234
CREATE FUNCTION f2()... -- oid=1235, calls f1() or oid=1234
DROP FUNCTION f1()
CREATE FUNCTION f3()... -- re-uses oid=1234

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matt Miller 2005-08-09 15:01:29 Re: PL/pgSQL: #option select_into_1_row (was SELECT INTO
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-08-09 14:58:56 Re: FW: [VulnWatch] [AppSecInc Advisory MYSQL05-V0003] Multiple Issues with MySQL User Defined Functions