From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(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: | 2012-03-09 19:34:04 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYMt1wQL7K457on8p-OzHrNFcT3yYcx=uBChsBgoebVzg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>>> Yeah, the use of XLogFile to mean something other than, well a file in
>>> the xlog, is greatly annoying.. I guess we could change it, but it
>>> goes pretty deep in the system so it's not a small change...
>
>> The whole thing was built around the lack of 64 bit integers. If we bit
>> the bullet and changed the whole thing to be just a single 64-bit
>> counter, we could probably delete thousands of lines of code.
>
> Hm. I think "thousands" is an overestimate, but yeah the logic could be
> greatly simplified. However, I'm not sure we could avoid breaking the
> existing naming convention for WAL files. How much do we care about
> that?
Probably not very much, since WAL files aren't portable across major
versions anyway. But I don't see why you couldn't keep the naming
convention - there's nothing to prevent you from converting a 64-bit
integer back into two 32-bit integers if and where needed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-03-09 19:34:40 | Re: Rules containing INSERT/UPDATE lack dependencies on target columns |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-09 19:26:44 | Re: xlog location arithmetic |