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
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? |