Re: oldest/newestCommitTs output by pg_controldata

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: oldest/newestCommitTs output by pg_controldata
Date: 2015-12-27 02:32:28
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSCG3Qt8hQ6T04+jvvQcRXmY-O6tirAq5_TUVrWDyDNKw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
> In looking at the exposing pg_controldata as function patch again, it
> struck me that the following output seems wrong:
>
> --------------
> Latest checkpoint's oldestCommitTs: 20257
> Latest checkpoint's newestCommitTs: 84159
> --------------
>
> Those numbers are XIDs, not timestamps. Shouldn't we either emit the
> actual timestamps, or else rename those to oldest/newestCommitXID?

I recall from the commit_ts thread that Alvaro had some real need to
make those fields XIDs and not timestamps, so +1 for renaming that as
suggested.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-12-27 02:44:32 Re: 9.5rc1 brin_summarize_new_values
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2015-12-27 01:58:16 Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.