Re: xlog location arithmetic
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-03-09T19:34:04Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >>> Yeah, the use of XLogFile to mean something other than, well a file in >>> the xlog, is greatly annoying.. I guess we could change it, but it >>> goes pretty deep in the system so it's not a small change... > >> The whole thing was built around the lack of 64 bit integers. If we bit >> the bullet and changed the whole thing to be just a single 64-bit >> counter, we could probably delete thousands of lines of code. > > Hm. I think "thousands" is an overestimate, but yeah the logic could be > greatly simplified. However, I'm not sure we could avoid breaking the > existing naming convention for WAL files. How much do we care about > that? Probably not very much, since WAL files aren't portable across major versions anyway. But I don't see why you couldn't keep the naming convention - there's nothing to prevent you from converting a 64-bit integer back into two 32-bit integers if and where needed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company