Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?

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