Re: Add contrib/pg_logicalsnapinspect

From: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Add contrib/pg_logicalsnapinspect
Date: 2024-09-26 03:27:22
Message-ID: CAJpy0uB44r5dXv0KXe2xz5dyhwwq484=LYPOcVYrbcLHFxVEJA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 11:01 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 11:23:17AM +0530, shveta malik wrote:
> > + OUT catchange_xip xid[]
> >
> > One question, what is xid datatype, is it too int8? Sorry, could not
> > find the correct doc.
>
> I think that we can get the answer from pg_type:
>
> postgres=# select typname,typlen from pg_type where typname = 'xid';
> typname | typlen
> ---------+--------
> xid | 4
> (1 row)
>
> > Since we are getting uint32 in Int64, this also needs to be accordingly.
>
> I think the way it is currently done is fine: we're dealing with TransactionId
> (and not with FullTransactionId). So, the Int64GetDatum() output would still
> stay in the "xid" range. Keeping xid in the .sql makes it clear that we are
> dealing with transaction ID.
>

Okay, got it. The 'xid' usage is fine then.

thanks
Shveta

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yugo Nagata 2024-09-26 03:51:10 Re: CREATE INDEX regression in 17 RC1 or expected behavior?
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2024-09-26 03:16:06 Re: CREATE INDEX regression in 17 RC1 or expected behavior?