Re: Time for 7.2.1?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Time for 7.2.1? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1298.1016221473@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Time for 7.2.1? (Thomas Lockhart <thomas@fourpalms.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart <thomas@fourpalms.org> writes: > It is somewhat complicated by the fact that my code tree is pretty > massively changed in this area as I implement an int64-based date/time > storage alternative to the float64 scheme we use now. The alternative > would be enabled with something like #ifdef HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP. > Benefits would include having a predictable precision behavior for all > allowed dates and times. Interesting. But if this is just an #ifdef, I can see some serious problems coming up the first time someone runs a backend compiled with one set of timestamp code in a database created with the other. May I suggest that the timestamp representation be identified in a field added to pg_control? That's how we deal with other options that affect database contents ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: