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

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRZNKPDUafgi-K1BrKvyL7Ocqg9PeBep525ZDEir3dinA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>  I'll update the patches according to that.
Here are the updated patches with the following changes (according to
previous comments):
- Datatype is renamed to pglsn, documentation, file names, regressions
and APIs are updated as well.
- The DatumGet* and *GetDatum APIs are renamed with PGLSN (Should be
PgLsn? But that's a detail)
- pg_create_physical_replication_slot uses PGLSNGetDatum for its 6th argument
For pageinspect, only page_header is impacted and I think that this
should be a separated patch as it makes necessary to dump it to 1.2. I
can write it later once the core parts are decided.
Thanks,
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Misaligned BufferDescriptors causing major performance problems on AMD
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Minor performance improvement in transition to external sort