Re: Standardizing how pg_waldump presents recovery conflict XID cutoffs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Standardizing how pg_waldump presents recovery conflict XID cutoffs
Date
Msg-id 20221115202937.isbzgca72zwe4qtl@awork3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Standardizing how pg_waldump presents recovery conflict XID cutoffs  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Responses Re: Standardizing how pg_waldump presents recovery conflict XID cutoffs
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

I like the idea of this, but:

On 2022-11-15 10:24:05 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I'm not necessarily that attached to the name latestCommittedXid. It
> is more accurate, but it's also a little bit too similar to another
> common XID symbol name, latestCompletedXid. Can anyone suggest an
> alternative?

... I strongly dislike latestCommittedXid. That seems at least as misleading
as latestRemovedXid and has the danger of confusion with latestCompletedXid
as you mention.

How about latestAffectedXid? Based on a quick scroll through the changed
structures it seems like it'd be reasonably discriptive for most?

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: HOT chain validation in verify_heapam()
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: meson oddities