On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 08:51:23AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 5:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I have to admit I don't see the point. None of those values is particularly
> > interesting to anybody without implementation level knowledge and those
> > will likely deal with
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-04-25 23:07:02 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > I'm not sure who is supposed to be able to read this sort of stuff:
> >
> > Latest checkpoint's NextXID: 0/7575
> > Latest checkpoint's NextOID: 49152
> > Latest chec
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 5:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I have to admit I don't see the point. None of those values is particularly
> interesting to anybody without implementation level knowledge and those
> will likely deal with them just fine. And I find the version with the
> shorter names far
--On 25. April 2013 23:19:14 -0400 Tom Lane wrote:
I think I've heard of scripts grepping the output of pg_controldata for
this that or the other. Any rewording of the labels would break that.
While I'm not opposed to improving the labels, I would vote against your
second, abbreviated scheme
On 2013-04-25 23:07:02 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I'm not sure who is supposed to be able to read this sort of stuff:
>
> Latest checkpoint's NextXID: 0/7575
> Latest checkpoint's NextOID: 49152
> Latest checkpoint's NextMultiXactId: 7
> Latest checkpoint's NextMultiOffset
On 26/04/13 18:53, Daniel Farina wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
I think I've heard of scripts grepping the output of pg_controldata for
this that or the other. Any rewording of the labels would break that.
While I'm not opposed
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think I've heard of scripts grepping the output of pg_controldata for
>>> this that or the other. Any rewording of the labels would break that.
>>> While I'm not opposed to improving the labels, I
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think I've heard of scripts grepping the output of pg_controldata for
>> this that or the other. Any rewording of the labels would break that.
>> While I'm not opposed to improving the labels, I would vote against your
>> second, abbreviated scheme be
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:22 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Comments?
>
> +1 from me.
>
> I don't think that these particular changes would break WAL-E,
> Heroku's continuous archiving tool, which has a class called
> PgControlDataParse
Tom Lane wrote:
> I think I've heard of scripts grepping the output of pg_controldata for
> this that or the other. Any rewording of the labels would break that.
> While I'm not opposed to improving the labels, I would vote against your
> second, abbreviated scheme because it would make things am
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Comments?
+1 from me.
I don't think that these particular changes would break WAL-E,
Heroku's continuous archiving tool, which has a class called
PgControlDataParser. However, it's possible to imagine someone being
affected in a similar
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> The comments in the pg_control.h header file use much more pleasant
> terms, which when put to use would lead to output similar to this:
> Latest checkpoint's next free transaction ID: 0/7575
> Latest checkpoint's next free OID:49152
I'm not sure who is supposed to be able to read this sort of stuff:
Latest checkpoint's NextXID: 0/7575
Latest checkpoint's NextOID: 49152
Latest checkpoint's NextMultiXactId: 7
Latest checkpoint's NextMultiOffset: 13
Latest checkpoint's oldestXID:1265
Latest checkpoint
13 matches
Mail list logo
