Michael Paquier wrote:
> I'm still on a -1 for that. You mentioned that there is perhaps no reason
> to delay a decision on this matter, but IMO there is no reason to rush
> either in doing something we may regret. And I am not the only one on this
> thread expressing concern about this extra data thingy.
>
> If this extra data field is going to be used to identify from which node a
> commit comes from, then it is another feature than what is written on the
> subject of this thread. In this case let's discuss it in the thread
> dedicated to replication identifiers, or come up with an extra patch once
> the feature for commit timestamps is done.
Introducing the extra data field in a later patch would mean an on-disk
representation change, i.e. pg_upgrade trouble.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services