Fri Sep 28 09:01:16 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Slony1-hackers] Re: XID in PG core/contrib
- Next message: [Slony1-hackers] Re: XID in PG core/contrib
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 9/28/07, Jan Wieck <JanWieck at yahoo.com> wrote: > On 9/28/2007 10:33 AM, Marko Kreen wrote: > > On 9/28/07, Tom Lane <tgl at sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> "Marko Kreen" <markokr at gmail.com> writes: > >> > bool txid_not_visible_in_snapshot(int8, snap) > >> > >> The last seems pretty thoroughly redundant? > > > > Ehhee. Jan, it's 2:1 now. I also think it unecessary. > > Yeah, yeah ... I can live without it. It's just, from that point of view > half of all comparison operators are redundant ;-) I think the point is that this is relatively complex operation. So having separate function in a small API that is just a NOT of a complex operation seems "unbalanced". -- marko
- Previous message: [Slony1-hackers] Re: XID in PG core/contrib
- Next message: [Slony1-hackers] Re: XID in PG core/contrib
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-hackers mailing list