Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(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: 2014-02-04 12:17:35
Message-ID: 20140204121735.GH12016@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-02-04 21:04:13 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 2014-02-04 19:17:51 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> @@ -180,7 +175,7 @@ pg_get_replication_slots(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
> >> else
> >> nulls[i++] = true;
> >> if (restart_lsn != InvalidTransactionId)
> >> - values[i++] = CStringGetTextDatum(restart_lsn_s);
> >> + values[i++] = restart_lsn;
> >> else
> >> nulls[i++] = true;
> >
> > Isn't that missing a LSNGetDatum()?
> Oops yes. Will fix.
>
> > Also, isn't it lacking the corresponding pg_proc change?
> restart_lsn is the 6th argument of pg_get_replication_slots, and the
> list of arguments of this function is already changed like that in my
> patch:
> {25,25,26,16,28,25} => {25,25,26,16,28,3220}
> Regards,

Ok.

I think the patch should also adapt pageinspect...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-02-04 12:21:01 Re: Re: Misaligned BufferDescriptors causing major performance problems on AMD
Previous Message Ronan Dunklau 2014-02-04 12:16:22 Re: Triggers on foreign tables