Re: pg_class.relpages/allvisible probably shouldn't be a int4 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: pg_class.relpages/allvisible probably shouldn't be a int4
Date
Msg-id 20140511091645.GA29889@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_class.relpages/allvisible probably shouldn't be a int4  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Responses Re: pg_class.relpages/allvisible probably shouldn't be a int4
List pgsql-hackers
On 2014-05-10 23:21:34 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > And adding a proper unsigned type doesn't sound like a small amount of work.
> 
> Perhaps not, but it's overdue. We ought to have one.

Maybe. But there's so many things to decide around it that I don't think
it's a good prerequisite for not showing essentially corrupted values in
a supported scenario.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT ..
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT ..