On 2021-01-20 08:50, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > Thanks for looking into this. I would like to keep both the LSN_FORMAT > and LSN_FORMAT_ARGS but with a note that the first can not be used in > elog() or in messages which require localization. We have many other > places doing snprintf() and such stuff, which can use LSN_FORMAT. If we > do so, the functions to output string representation will not be needed > so they can be removed.
Then you'd end up with half the code doing this and half the code doing that. That doesn't sound very attractive. It's not like "%X/%X" is hard to type.
:). That's true. I thought LSN_FORMAT would document the string representation of an LSN. But anyway I am fine with this as well.
