On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 2:45 PM Ron Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 5:45 AM Dominique Devienne <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi. A few weeks ago, one of our clusters, with high DDL churn from >> UTs, crossed the 2B mark for OIDs, which exposed a bug in our code. > > Because you track and remember OIDs?
No. I don't even remember the exact bug, and we lost networking to our SCM right now, so can't even look it up (obviously it's not decentralized SCM). But signed vs unsigned and 2B+ is a classic bug, worth testing for, except it's impractical to reach such high OIDs on demand. Given there's a cluster-wide OID counter, surely there's a way, even hackish, to influence that counter, no? PostgreSQL itself has mitigation strategies when running out of OIDs, doesn't it? It's a different use-case, but that implies also reaching large OIDs, and I suspect this is unit tested, no?
