On 4/13/2006 6:19 AM, John Sidney-Woollett wrote: > My tables are defined "WITHOUT OID" - does that make a difference?
That's good so far. The other thing that is eating OID's are temporary objects. I personally consider the implementation of temp tables broken for precisely that matter. If your application uses temp tables, sooner or later it will cause an OID counter wrap around and then you run the risk of random transaction failures due to duplicate key errors on CREATE TEMP TABLE. Jan > John > Hannu Krosing wrote:> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2006-04-13 kell 10:06, kirjutas > John> Sidney-Woollett:> >>I just added a new table to a slony relication set. > The new table seems >>to have a really high tab_reloid value of 94,198,669> > > ...> >>Is this something I should be worried about? Can I find out where all > >>the intermediate OIDs have gone?> > > probably to data rows, unless you > have all your tables defined using> WITHOUT OID. OIDs are assigned from a > global "sequence".> > --------> Hannu> > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)---------------------------> TIP 4: Have you searched our list > archives?> > > http://archives.postgresql.org_______________________________________________Slony1-general > mailing [EMAIL > PROTECTED]://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] # _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
