Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoaWQ2LfbjuXo4EXY_o-A_VvjVCZk-LtYjQuBPnjxaFPUA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> There's already a couple of SQL function dealing with XLogRecPtrs and
> the logical replication work will add a couple of more. Currently each
> of those funtions taking/returning an LSN does sprintf/scanf to
> print/parse the strings. Which both is awkward and potentially
> noticeable performancewise.
>
> It seems relatively simple to add a proper type, with implicit casts
> from text, instead?

I'm pretty sure that this was discussed last year, and I voted for it
-- except for the implicit casts part, perhaps -- but more people
voted against it, so it died.  I still think that was a mistake, but I
just work here.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good
Next
From: Euler Taveira
Date:
Subject: Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?