Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby utility and administrator functions

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 17:44 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> That's been "extended with an epoch counter" per the docs; I don't think
>> that's appropriate for the new functions, is it?

> I assumed it was, so you can subtract them easily.

> It can be done either way, I guess. Happy to provide what people need. I
> just dreamed up a few that sounded useful.

I don't think you should be inventing new functions without clear
use-cases in mind.  Depending on what the use is, I could see either the
xid or the txid definition as being *required*.

In any case, do not use the wrong return type for the definition you're
implementing.

            regards, tom lane