[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lamar Owen) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > [trimmed cc:list] > On Wednesday 18 July 2001 17:09, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > OK, we need to vote on whether Oid's are optional, and whether we can > > have them not created by default. > > [All the below IMHO] > > OID's should be optional. yep. we don't depend upon oids > 32 bits. that's pretty standard practice for serious db apps. however, tx limit is a real problem. my vote is for solving the tx limit before chaning the oid problem. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- RE: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Mikheev, Vadim
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- RE: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Mikheev, Vadim
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Larry Rosenman
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Lamar Owen
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Ross J. Reedstrom
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Hiroshi Inoue