On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:39 AM Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > This looks like a pretty good analysis to me. As it relates to the > question about allowing users to specify an OID, I'd be inclined to > allow it but only for OIDs >64k. We've certainly reserved things in the > past and I don't see any issue with having that reservation here, but if > we're going to build the capability to specify the OID into CREATE > DATABASE then it seems a bit odd to disallow users from using it, as > long as we're preventing them from causing problems with it. > > Are there issues that you see with allowing users to specify the OID > even with the >64k restriction..? I can't think of one offhand but > perhaps I'm missing something.
So I actually should have said 16k here, not 64k, as somebody already pointed out to me off-list. Whee! I don't know of a reason not to let people do that, other than that it seems like an attractive nuisance. People will do it and it will fail because they chose a duplicate OID, or they'll complain that a regular dump and restore didn't preserve their database OIDs, or maybe they'll expect that they can copy a database from one cluster to another because they gave it the same OID! That said, I don't see a great harm in it. It just seems to me like exposing knobs to users that don't seem to have any legitimate use may be borrowing trouble. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
