On 2019-08-18 16:17, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> I'm just curious to better understand the naming convention behind wal
> files, because I've seen on a system of mine that the wals created
> were:
>
> 0005020E00FF
> 0005020F
>
> while I was expecting 20E0x100.
You are in p
At Sun, 18 Aug 2019 16:17:03 +0200, Luca Ferrari wrote in
> I'm just curious to better understand the naming convention behind wal
> files, because I've seen on a system of mine that the wals created
> were:
>
> 0005020E00FF
> 0005020F
>
> while I was expecting 20E
I'm just curious to better understand the naming convention behind wal
files, because I've seen on a system of mine that the wals created
were:
0005020E00FF
0005020F
while I was expecting 20E0x100. So I digged into the code and I've
seen, from the XLogFileName macro,
