Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i5WwX-00043h-Fe for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2019 15:11:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i5WwV-0001zE-1k for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2019 15:11:31 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i5WwU-0001ve-NO for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2019 15:11:30 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1i5WwS-0001ET-5x for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2019 15:11:29 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x84FBN58002688; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 11:11:23 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andres Freund cc: Alvaro Herrera , Bruce Momjian , pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Release notes on "reserved OIDs" In-reply-to: <20190904150005.ncwlp3gxwp7n55ja@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <20190830153424.GA3324@alvherre.pgsql> <29753.1567182909@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190904094055.og3vq27tj7we7x4n@alap3.anarazel.de> <22548.1567604503@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190904150005.ncwlp3gxwp7n55ja@alap3.anarazel.de> Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund message dated "Wed, 04 Sep 2019 08:00:05 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2686.1567609883.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2019 11:11:23 -0400 Message-ID: <2687.1567609883@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Andres Freund writes: > On 2019-09-04 09:41:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> As things stand after a6417078c, the safest place for a fork to put >> private OIDs is actually from 7999 down; patches shouldn't touch that >> range, and it'll be a long time till we hit it working up. > Should we just update the comment to reference that then? WFM. I'm planning to make a pass over the release notes soon, and will update this one when I get to it. regards, tom lane