Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> That might be a bit excessive. As I understand it, arrays of built-in > >> types > >> (e.g., int[]) should work fine. I suspect the majority of uses of arrays > >> will > >> be with built-in types, so allowing that would help a significant portion > >> of > >> installations. > > > Agreed. I realized that last night, and have modified pg_migrator to > > test FirstNormalObjectId. > > That's really the wrong thing. It's safe to assume OIDs below 10000 > are portable across versions, because for them not to be would require > someone to have changed a hand assignment. However, OIDs between 10000 > and 16K are assigned on-the-fly by initdb, and those are *not* likely > to be portable across versions. As an example, the rowtype for > pg_statistic has slightly different OIDs in 8.3 and 8.4. So if you > allow someone to port a database that is using a system catalog's > rowtype, it will fail. Admittedly that's not a real likely scenario, > but if you're going to have a check it should be accurate.
Thanks, I changed FirstNormalObjectId to FirstBootstrapObjectId for the array/enum/composite oid test, and added a C comment about it. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
