Re: WAL format changes
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2012-06-24T16:24:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Update pgindent install instructions and update typedef list.
- 60801944fa10 9.2.0 cited
Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now. On 19.06.2012 18:57, Robert Haas wrote: >> Should we keep the old representation in the replication protocol messages? >> That would make it simpler to write a client that works with different >> server versions (like pg_receivexlog). Or, while we're at it, perhaps we >> should mandate network-byte order for all the integer and XLogRecPtr fields >> in the replication protocol. That would make it easier to write a client >> that works across different architectures, in>= 9.3. The contents of the >> WAL would of course be architecture-dependent, but it would be nice if >> pg_receivexlog and similar tools could nevertheless be >> architecture-independent. > > I share Andres' question about how we're doing this already. I think > if we're going to break this, I'd rather do it in 9.3 than 5 years > from now. At this point it's just a minor annoyance, but it'll > probably get worse as people write more tools that understand WAL. I didn't touch the replication protocol yet, but I think we should do it some time during 9.3. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com