Re: protocol-level wait-for-LSN - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: protocol-level wait-for-LSN
Date
Msg-id f7af9c63-41c3-446f-8488-48535326224c@eisentraut.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: protocol-level wait-for-LSN  (Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 30.10.24 10:03, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 at 16:51, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
>> Thoughts?
> 
> +                   snprintf(xloc, sizeof(xloc), "%X/%X",
> LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(logptr))
> +                   pq_sendstring(&buf, xloc);
> 
> nit: I feel that sending the LSN as a string seems unnecessarily
> wasteful of bytes. I'd rather send it as its binary representation.

My thinking here was: This protocol is also used by things that are not 
PostgreSQL.  They might have other representations for "position to wait 
for".  I don't know, but it's something to think about.




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bertrand Drouvot
Date:
Subject: Re: relfilenode statistics
Next
From: Bertrand Drouvot
Date:
Subject: Re: define pg_structiszero(addr, s, r)