> > Second, across the protocol docs, rather than using Int32 and Int64, > which > > generally look like they're signed (depending on which language you're > > coming from), I'd consider using UInt32/UInt64, which are unambiguous > with > > regards to signed-ness. > > Well, they are actually signed, so I'm confused why you think we should > change the documentation to unsigned. >
Interesting... I'm not 100% sure, but I recently received a report that the WAL coordinates in XLogData ( https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/protocol-replication.html) are unsigned longs, is that a mistake? Are you saying all values in the protocol are always signed?