Feedback-ID: ie3de48e3:Fastmail
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 08:41:59 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Translation of the NextOID message in pg_controldata
Message-ID: <aqeO1OU7uZjhioAq@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <aqeNcd4403BGVZqc@paquier.xyz>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aqeO1OU7uZjhioAq%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2026-Sep-14, Michael Paquier wrote:

> The magic solution I can think of is to remove the markers from the
> translatable strings, and replace them with a set of %s, as of the
> attached patch, then use a pre-built string that itself uses
> OID8_FORMAT.  I am pretty sure we have used this method in other
> places of the tree, but I cannot pinpoint where, on top of my mind.

Yeah, we used to do that for long long, until we got rid of it using the
%z format instead.  I was happy about no longer having that coding
pattern TBH.

I think this change would break what I proposed in
https://postgr.es/m/202601310924.yoik5n3blgt4@alvherre.pgsql
(FTR I decided to heed Peter's advice and not implement it in the way
proposed there, but instead build some generic facility that can also be
used elsewhere.)

I'm not sure I understand why we care that we hardcode that Oid8 is the
same as uint64.  It's never been a problem that Oid is the same as uin32 ...

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"No tengo por qué estar de acuerdo con lo que pienso"
                             (Carlos Caszeli)