| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type? |
| Date: | 2013-12-12 16:55:51 |
| Message-ID: | 18722.1386867351@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Robert Haas escribi:
>> I am happy to have my old patch resurrected - could become a trend.
>> But someone should probably go back and check who objected and for
>> what reasons.
> Here it is FWIW:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CA+TgmoZRMNN0eVEsD-kxB9e-MvdmwoTi6guuJUvQP_8q2C5Cyg(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com
AFAICS the objections were "why bother with a datatype for just one
function". If we've now got multiple use-cases, that loses its force.
I'm not, however, terribly thrilled with the suggestions to add implicit
casts associated with this type. Implicit casts are generally dangerous.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2013-12-12 17:07:31 | Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2013-12-12 16:44:20 | Re: GIN improvements part 1: additional information |