Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: xlog location arithmetic

From: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: xlog location arithmetic
Date: 2012-01-17 14:46:07
Message-ID: CAEYLb_WCTJKXV9UyJ9RgkMHH9aYid0NxmVEcbUE0esDB5nr8zA@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 20 December 2011 10:27, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> Doing it in numeric should be perfectly fine. The only real reason to
> pick int8 over in this context would be performance, but it's not like
> this is something that's going to be called in really performance
> critical paths...

FYI, my group commit patch has a little macro, in the spirit of
XLByteAdvance, to get the delta between two LSNs in bytes as an
uint64.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2012-01-17 15:01:23
Subject: psql \timing vs failed statements
Previous:From: Peter GeogheganDate: 2012-01-17 14:35:28
Subject: Re: Group commit, revised

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group