Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 22:44:53 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
	pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs"
Message-ID: <20190831024453.GB25522@momjian.us>
References: <20190830153424.GA3324@alvherre.pgsql>
 <29753.1567182909@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <29753.1567182909@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 12:35:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > Hmm.  I wonder if this item really belongs in the release notes at all.
> > My view is that this was interim policy, not necessarily a permanent
> > thing; and it's oriented strictly towards PG developers rather than end
> > users or even fork-developers.
> 
> I think it's the sort of thing that we sometimes cover in the
> "source code" changes of the release notes.  But yeah, 09568ec3d's
> idea was pretty much fully superseded by a6417078c, so if we're
> going to document anything it should be the latter not the former.

OK, sure.  I was just basing the release notes on this commit text:

    Add a note suggesting that oids in forks should be assigned in the
    9000-9999 range.

I was looking to see information that was relevant for the release
notes.  Please update as desired.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +