Hi, >> These 2 discussions show that it's a painful experience to run into >> this problem, and that the hackers have ideas on how to fix it, but >> those fixes haven't materialized for years. So I would say that, yes, >> this info belongs in the hard-limits section, because who knows how >> long it'll take this to be fixed. >> >> Please submit a patch. >> > This is a production case for large databases with high update rates, but is > mistaken > with reaching table size limit, although size limit is processed correctly. > > The note on TOAST limitation does not mention that TOAST values are not > actually > updated on UPDATE operation - old value is marked as dead and new one is > inserted, > and dead values should be vacuumed before value OID could be reused. The worst > is that the INSERT/UPDATE clause does not fail if there is no OID available - > it is > looped in an infinite loop of sorting out OIDs.
OK, so here is the documentation patch proposal. I've also added two rows touching the subject of pg_largeobjects, as it is also related to the OIDs topic. Please feel free to send adjusted patches. Regards, -J.
v1-0001-doc-Add-some-OID-TOAST-related-limitations-to-the.patch
Description: Binary data
