| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 64-bit queryId? |
| Date: | 2017-10-03 16:06:46 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaVLg-p=XMDRmapwbAgqUT83BaZy5C0JA7Do9NsRcr85Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Alexander Korotkov
<a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> BTW, you didn't comment Tom's suggestion about dropping high-order bit which
> trades minor user user confusion to minor loss of precision.
Oh, I thought I did comment on that. I favor allowing negative IDs
rather than minor loss of precision.
> TBH, for me it's not so important whether we allow negative queryIds or drop
> high-order bit. I would be anyway very good to have 64-(or 63-)bit queryIds
> committed.
Great.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-10-03 16:23:17 | Re: SendRowDescriptionMessage() is slow for queries with a lot of columns |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2017-10-03 16:04:57 | Re: 64-bit queryId? |