From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: concerns around pg_lsn |
Date: | 2019-07-30 12:36:45 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZBEqbGYLJ3pBtAm7-Qb+zTWEJV6zM-Jm2qpcEPOBw8jw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:52 AM Jeevan Ladhe
<jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> My only concern was something that we internally treat as invalid, why do
> we allow, that as a valid value for that type. While I am not trying to
> reinvent the wheel here, I am trying to understand if there had been any
> idea behind this and I am missing it.
Well, the word "invalid" can mean more than one thing. Something can
be valid or invalid depending on context. I can't have -2 dollars in
my wallet, but I could have -2 dollars in my bank account, because the
bank will allow me to pay out slightly more money than I actually have
on the idea that I will pay them back later (and with interest!). So
as an amount of money in my wallet, -2 is invalid, but as an amount of
money in my bank account, it is valid.
0/0 is not a valid LSN in the sense that (in current releases) we
never write a WAL record there, but it's OK to compute with it.
Subtracting '0/0'::pg_lsn seems useful as a way to convert an LSN to
an absolute byte-index in the WAL stream.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ibrar Ahmed | 2019-07-30 13:00:46 | Re: SQL:2011 PERIODS vs Postgres Ranges? |
Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2019-07-30 12:33:00 | Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots |