objsubid vs subobjid
Hackorum builds and tests every patch posted to the lists, not only commitfest submissions. This is Hackorum's own CI rather than the PostgreSQL project's, and it is still under testing - please report anything that looks wrong.
You can run a PostgreSQL built from this patch straight from Docker, with no checkout and no build:
docker run --rm -p 5432:5432 ghcr.io/hackorum-dev/postgres-patch:t36105psql -h localhost -U postgresBuilt from patchset v1 (message #1), July 28, 2026 at 08:08 AM.
Every patchset is also pushed to a branch of our PostgreSQL fork, so you can check out the same tree CI built. Without a PostgreSQL checkout:
git clone --branch t36105_1 https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.gitIn a checkout you already have, add the fork once:
git remote add hackorum https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.gitthen, for this patchset and every later one:
git fetch hackorum t36105_1 && git checkout t36105_1Patchset v1 (message #1) is on t36105_1
pg_get_object_address() currently returns a field called subobjid, while
pg_depend calls that objsubid. I'm guessing that wasn't on purpose
(especially because internally the function uses objsubid), and it'd be
nice to fix it.
Attached does that, as well as updating the input naming on the other
functions for consistency. I stopped short of changing the instances of
subobjid in the C code to reduce backpatch issues, but maybe that should
be done too...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
On 2/22/17 19:35, Jim Nasby wrote:
pg_get_object_address() currently returns a field called subobjid, while
pg_depend calls that objsubid. I'm guessing that wasn't on purpose
(especially because internally the function uses objsubid), and it'd be
nice to fix it.
I'm in favor of changing it, but it could theoretically break someone's
code. I don't know what the practical use for these functions is.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2/22/17 19:35, Jim Nasby wrote:
pg_get_object_address() currently returns a field called subobjid, while
pg_depend calls that objsubid. I'm guessing that wasn't on purpose
(especially because internally the function uses objsubid), and it'd be
nice to fix it.I'm in favor of changing it, but it could theoretically break someone's
code.
Yes, it was an oversight. +1 for changing.
I don't know what the practical use for these functions is.
This was originally written for BDR use in DDL replication. Partly the
interfaces exist for testing purposes (to make sure that object
addresses can roundtrip between internal OID numerical representation
and set of names); what BDR uses is the path that goes via event
triggers (pg_event_trigger_ddl_commands and pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects).
I didn't find any use of the name "subobjid" anywhere in BDR.
--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 3/1/17 09:51, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2/22/17 19:35, Jim Nasby wrote:
pg_get_object_address() currently returns a field called subobjid, while
pg_depend calls that objsubid. I'm guessing that wasn't on purpose
(especially because internally the function uses objsubid), and it'd be
nice to fix it.I'm in favor of changing it, but it could theoretically break someone's
code.Yes, it was an oversight. +1 for changing.
OK done.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 3/1/17 9:24 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 3/1/17 09:51, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2/22/17 19:35, Jim Nasby wrote:
pg_get_object_address() currently returns a field called subobjid, while
pg_depend calls that objsubid. I'm guessing that wasn't on purpose
(especially because internally the function uses objsubid), and it'd be
nice to fix it.I'm in favor of changing it, but it could theoretically break someone's
code.Yes, it was an oversight. +1 for changing.
OK done.
BTW, did you backpatch as well? The function was added in 9.5.
Presumably we wouldn't normally do that, but if we think this is unused
enough maybe it's worth it.
--
Jim Nasby, Chief Data Architect, OpenSCG
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 3/5/17 16:10, Jim Nasby wrote:
BTW, did you backpatch as well? The function was added in 9.5.
Presumably we wouldn't normally do that, but if we think this is unused
enough maybe it's worth it.
It's a catalog change, so we can't backpatch it.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers