Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYBbkRytOY=Rzo=rLeHM2o4d6SqzDvm2rWvWidmY+vJtw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type? (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 2014-02-19 12:47:40 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Michael Paquier >>> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> Yes, that's a good precedent in multiple ways. >>> > Here are updated patches to use pg_lsn instead of pglsn... >>> >>> OK, so I think this stuff is all committed now, with assorted changes. >>> Thanks for your work on this. >> >> cool, thanks you two. >> >> I wonder if pg_stat_replication shouldn't be updated to use it as well? >> SELECT * FROM pg_attribute WHERE attname ~ '(location|lsn)'; only shows >> that as names that are possible candidates for conversion. > I was sure to have forgotten some views or functions in the previous > patch... Please find attached a patch making pg_stat_replication use > pg_lsn instead of the existing text fields. > Regards, Committed. Do we want to do anything about pageinspect? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: