Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?
Date
Msg-id 9533.1564015350@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-07-24 20:34:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, I would absolutely NOT recommend that you open that can of worms
>> right now.  We have looked at adding unsigned integer types in the past
>> and it looked like a mess.

> I assume Thomas was thinking more of another bespoke type like xid, just
> wider.  There's some notational advantage in not being able to
> immediately do math etc on xids.

Well, we could invent an xid8 type if we want, just don't try to make
it part of the numeric hierarchy (as indeed xid isn't).

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: On the stability of TAP tests for LDAP