Horton

Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 2020-04-17T19:26:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2020-Apr-17, Andres Freund wrote:

> Yes? But that type doesn't exist in isolation. Having yet another
> significantly different representation of 64bit xids (as plain 64 bit
> integers, and as some 32/32 epoch/xid split) would make an already
> confusing situation even more complex.

On the contrary -- I think it would clarify a confusing situation.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Introduce xid8-based functions to replace txid_XXX.

  2. Add SQL type xid8 to expose FullTransactionId to users.

  3. Replace the former method of determining snapshot xmax --- to wit, calling