Re: Printing LSN made easy

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz
Cc: peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Subject: Re: Printing LSN made easy
Date: 2021-01-21 00:29:59
Message-ID: 20210121.092959.1978278159050776724.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Wed, 20 Jan 2021 16:40:59 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote in
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 07:25:37AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > It looks like we are not getting any consensus on this approach. One
> > reduced version I would consider is just the second part, so you'd write
> > something like
> >
> > snprintf(lsnchar, sizeof(lsnchar), "%X/%X",
> > LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(lsn));
> >
> > This would still reduce notational complexity quite a bit but avoid any
> > funny business with the format strings.
>
> That seems reasonable to me. So +1.

That seems in the good balance. +1, too.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2021-01-21 00:46:29 Re: POC: postgres_fdw insert batching
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2021-01-21 00:21:29 Re: POC: postgres_fdw insert batching