Re: 4 billion record limit?
Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>
From: Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>
To: brad <brad@kieser.net>
Cc: Mathieu Arnold <arn_mat@club-internet.fr>, Postgres Users <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Date: 2000-07-28T00:03:36Z
Lists: pgsql-general, pgsql-novice
brad wrote: > > Mathieu Arnold wrote: > > > Chris Bitmead wrote: > > > > > > > > Any complex scheme to solve this seems like a waste of time. In a couple > > > of years when you are likely to be running out, you'll probably be > > > upgrading your computer to a 64bit one with a newer version of postgres, > > > and then the problem will disappear. > > > > that's the kind of thing people said about y2k, isn't it ? > I don't want to start a war but I must agree here... I recoil when the > argument is put forward for a "you will never use that up" approach. > The best that I can offer is: Oh yeah? Seen some of the Beowulf clusters > around recently? Regardless, the solution is not to make a complex oid reuse scheme. The solution is 64bit oids which is easily solved on a 64bit computer, but requires a bit of effort to make it work on 32bit machines. If you want to make the effort - go for it!