Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit queryId? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit queryId?
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoaVLg-p=XMDRmapwbAgqUT83BaZy5C0JA7Do9NsRcr85Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit queryId?  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> BTW, you didn't comment Tom's suggestion about dropping high-order bit which
> trades minor user user confusion to minor loss of precision.

Oh, I thought I did comment on that.  I favor allowing negative IDs
rather than minor loss of precision.

> TBH, for me it's not so important whether we allow negative queryIds or drop
> high-order bit.  I would be anyway very good to have 64-(or 63-)bit queryIds
> committed.

Great.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit queryId?
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SendRowDescriptionMessage() is slow for queries with alot of columns