On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2016-01-26 14:56:21 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Is there a reason we don't have casts between int8 and pg_lsn? AFAICT it
> > works fine if I create the cast manually... Is it because of
> > signed/unsigned if people have really really many transactions?
> What for do you want that cast? Yes, the internally mostly share the
> representation, but other than that, I don't really see why it's
In this case, mostly legacy compatibility. Making an app that works with
versions that don't have pg_lsn have a nice path forward to the modern
world. Being able to cast from pg_lsn to int8 can also make it easier to
work with the values in the client application, though I don't need that
for this particular one.