Re: +(pg_lsn, int8) and -(pg_lsn, int8) operators

From: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: +(pg_lsn, int8) and -(pg_lsn, int8) operators
Date: 2020-04-23 16:27:43
Message-ID: CAExHW5v20Y=RiDDO3W2YXLAh0MKW7=cSU980Ygt6Rx-d3vATNw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:51 PM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to propose to introduce the +(pg_lsn, int8) and -(pg_lsn, int8)
> operators. The + operator allows us to add the number of bytes into pg_lsn,
> resulting new pg_lsn. The - operator allows us to substract the number
> of bytes from pg_lsn, resulting new pg_lsn. Thought?
> I sometimes need these features for debuging purpose.

As it's presented in the patch I don't see much value in calling it as
LSN arithmetic. If we could do something like LSN of Nth WAL record
+/- <number of WAL records, n> = LSN of N+/- n th log record that
would be interesting. :)

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-04-23 16:43:27 Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2020-04-23 16:23:02 Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?