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
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 |