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

<p dir="ltr">Bonus points if you implement a (explicit) cast to and from timestamptz :)<p dir="ltr">-- <br /> greg<div
class="gmail_quote">On11 Dec 2013 12:41, "Andres Freund" <<a
href="mailto:andres@2ndquadrant.com">andres@2ndquadrant.com</a>>wrote:<br type="attribution" /><blockquote
class="gmail_quote"style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Hi,<br /><br /> There's
alreadya couple of SQL function dealing with XLogRecPtrs and<br /> the logical replication work will add a couple of
more.Currently each<br /> of those funtions taking/returning an LSN does sprintf/scanf to<br /> print/parse the
strings.Which both is awkward and potentially<br /> noticeable performancewise.<br /><br /> It seems relatively simple
toadd a proper type, with implicit casts<br /> from text, instead?<br /><br /> Greetings,<br /><br /> Andres Freund<br
/><br/> --<br />  Andres Freund                     <a href="http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/"
target="_blank">http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/</a><br/>  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services<br
/><br/><br /> --<br /> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (<a
href="mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org">pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org</a>)<br/> To make changes to your
subscription:<br/><a href="http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers"
target="_blank">http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers</a><br/></blockquote></div>