| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Support for XLogRecPtr in expand_fmt_string? |
| Date: | 2012-07-13 20:01:55 |
| Message-ID: | 23720.1342209715@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:34:35PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I would rather get rid of this %X/%X notation.
> +1
I'm for it if we can find a less messy way of dealing with the
platform-specific-format-code issue. I don't want to be plugging
UINT64_FORMAT into string literals in a pile of places.
Personally I think that a function returning a static string
buffer is probably good enough for this. If there are places
where we need to print more than one XLogRecPtr value in a message,
we could have two of them. (Yeah, it's ugly, but less so than
dealing with platform-specific format codes everywhere.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-07-13 20:05:37 | isolation check takes a long time |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-07-13 19:47:56 | Re: Support for XLogRecPtr in expand_fmt_string? |