| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type? |
| Date: | 2014-02-06 02:26:18 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqS+AH8H4o4GXCr=KUBRTbROgqBg9xo1Br_8xiyae3uHDw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On 2/5/14, 1:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>>> Perhaps this type should be called pglsn, since it's an
>>> implementation-specific detail and not a universal concept like int,
>>> point, or uuid.
>>
>> If we're going to do that, I suggest pg_lsn rather than pglsn. We
>> already have pg_node_tree, so using underscores for separation would
>> be more consistent.
>
> Yes, that's a good precedent in multiple ways.
Here are updated patches to use pg_lsn instead of pglsn...
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 20140206_lsn_datatype_v4.patch | text/x-diff | 17.9 KB |
| 20140206_lsn_func_cleanup_v3.patch | text/x-diff | 22.7 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2014-02-06 02:26:37 | Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2014-02-06 02:14:47 | Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT |