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

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?