On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 02:06:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Sooner or later we are going to need to go to 8-byte TOAST object > identifiers. Maybe we should think about doing that sooner not > later rather than trying to invent some anti-wraparound solution > here.
Yay! Is there any lift in separating TOAST OIDs from the rest? > In principle, you could support existing TOAST tables and pointers > containing 4-byte IDs in parallel with the new ones. > Not sure how pg_upgrade would handle it exactly though. This is yet another reason we should get away from in-place binary upgrade as a strategy. It's always been fragile, and it's only ever been justifiable on grounds of hardware economics that no longer obtain. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
