Re: Is monotonous xid8 is a right way to do? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Maxim Orlov
Subject Re: Is monotonous xid8 is a right way to do?
Date
Msg-id CACG=ezZTvzyBscxN3xoWm14WXmg3C7sJeg3UKJVrfHYhSeHxrg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Is monotonous xid8 is a right way to do?  (Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi!

In my view, FullTransactionId type was implemented without considering 64 bit wraparound. Which seems to be unlikely to happen. Then on that basis xid8 type was created. Details of that particular implementation infiltrated into documentation and became sort of normal. In my opinion, semantically, both of these types should be treated as similar types although with different sizes. Thus, again, xid and xid8 types should be a ring and have no min and max functions. At least, in a sort of "conventional" way when minimal value is minimal in a mathematical way and so for maximum.

For example, max may be implemented as max(0, 42, 18446744073709551615) = 42, which is a bit weird.

--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Date:
Subject: Re: Is monotonous xid8 is a right way to do?
Next
From: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Date:
Subject: Re: Is monotonous xid8 is a right way to do?