pgsql-server/src/include/catalog pg_proc.h
CVSROOT: /cvsroot
Module name: pgsql-server
Changes by: tgl@postgresql.org 02/08/20 15:23:07
Modified files:
src/include/catalog: pg_proc.h
Log message:
Use a non-duplicate OID for pg_lock_status.
I thought he sent in a patch the specifically mentioned he didn't use a
duplicate oid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
CVSROOT: /cvsroot
Module name: pgsql-server
Changes by: tgl@postgresql.org 02/08/20 15:23:07Modified files:
src/include/catalog: pg_proc.hLog message:
Use a non-duplicate OID for pg_lock_status.---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
I thought he sent in a patch the specifically mentioned he didn't use a
duplicate oid.
duplicate_oids didn't think so. The conflict was against another system
catalog, so you'd not have noticed if you didn't run duplicate_oids.
regards, tom lane
No - that was for my pg_stat_reset patch, and at the time of submission it
didn't conflict with any other oids...
Chris
Show quoted text
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
Sent: Wednesday, 21 August 2002 4:45 AM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src/include/catalog pg_proc.hI thought he sent in a patch the specifically mentioned he didn't use a
duplicate oid.------------------------------------------------------------------
---------Tom Lane wrote:
CVSROOT: /cvsroot
Module name: pgsql-server
Changes by: tgl@postgresql.org 02/08/20 15:23:07Modified files:
src/include/catalog: pg_proc.hLog message:
Use a non-duplicate OID for pg_lock_status.---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
No - that was for my pg_stat_reset patch, and at the time of submission it
didn't conflict with any other oids...
Yeah, things are moving so quickly now that patches which add catalog
items may easily hit each other in transit. The best short-term
solution seems to be to expect committers to run 'duplicate_oids' before
committing anything that adds catalog entries.
In the long run we might want to think about reassigning the
hand-assigned OIDs in some more-rational fashion; the current OID layout
is a complete mess with no visible rhyme or reason...
regards, tom lane