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

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.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: 2020-04-17T18:07:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:45 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> You seem to be entirely disregarding my actual point, namely that
> txid_current(), as well as some other txid_* functions, have returned
> 64bit xids for many many years. txid_current() is the only function to
> get the current xid in a reasonable way. I don't understand how a
> proposal to add a 32/32 bit representation *in addition* to the existing
> 32 and 64bit representations is going to improve the situation. Nor do I
> see changing txid_current()'s return format as something we're going to
> go for.
>
> I did not argue against a function to turn 64bit xids into epoch/32bit
> xid or such.

I thought we were talking about how the new xid8 type ought to behave.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



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