On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:48 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > Why choosing a random position within [8000,9999]? This leads to the > following messages for example with multiple runs, which is confusing: > Suggested random unused OID: 9473 (527 consecutive OID(s) available > Suggested random unused OID: 8159 (31 consecutive OID(s) available > Suggested random unused OID: 9491 (509 consecutive OID(s) available > > Wouldn't it be better to choose the lowest position in the development > range, and then adapt the suggestion based on that?
No, it wouldn't. The entire point of suggesting a totally random OID is that it minimizes the probability of a collision among concurrently developed patches, per the policy established by commit a6417078 -- what you suggest would defeat the very purpose of this patch. In fact, having everybody see the same suggestion from unused_oids would *maximize* the number of OID collisions. > We could > recommend the range if there are at least 10 OIDs available in the > range from the lowest position, and there are few patches eating more > than 5-10 OIDs at once. That sounds like an over-engineered solution to a problem that doesn't exist. -- Peter Geoghegan