>> What's wrong with 64-bit oids (except extra 4bytes)? > Portability, mostly. Oh, there's one other small problem: breaking the on-the-wire protocol. We send OIDs as column datatype identifiers, so an 8-byte-OID backend would not interoperate with clients that didn't also think OID is 8 bytes. Aside from client/server compatibility issues, that raises the portability ante a good deal --- not only your server machine has to have 'long long' support, but so do all your application environments. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Bruce Momjian
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Hiroshi Inoue
- 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) Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- [HACKERS] Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) Tom Lane
- [HACKERS] Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) Alessio Bragadini
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Lamar Owen
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Ashley Cambrell
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Philip Warner
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: OID wraparound (was Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend) Tom Lane