On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Agreed. As an alternative we could just have a single - probably longer > than NAMEDATALEN - string to identify replication progress and rely on > the users of the facility to build the identifier automatically > themselves using components that are helpful in their system.
I tend to feel like a generic identifier would be better. I'm not sure why something like a UUID wouldn't be enough, though. Arbitrary-length identifiers will be bad for performance, and 128 bits ought to be enough for anyone. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
