Re: integer datetimes

On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:27:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> > Our docs for the integer datetime option says:
> > Note also that the integer datetimes
> > code is newer than the floating-point code, and we still find bugs in it
> > from time to time.
> 
> > Is the last sentence about bugs really true anymore? At least the buildfarm
> > seems to have a lot *more* machines with it enabled than without.
> 
> Buildfarm proves only that the regression tests don't expose any bugs,
> not that there aren't any.
> 
> > (I'm thinking about making it the defautl for the vc++ build, which is
> > why I came across that)
> 
> FWIW, there are several Linux distros that build their RPMs that way,
> so it's not like people aren't using it.  But it seems like we find bugs
> in the datetime/interval stuff all the time, as people trip over
> different weird edge cases.

Certainly, but is it more likely to trip on these in the integer
datetime case, really? 

//Magnus