Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTimkJqvcQLfDgMOLjQ0sJjn7AC5ypOhyugQHaNWx@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: >> Greg Stark wrote: >>> Did we have a solution for the problem that understanding which >>> columns are timestamps requires having a tuple descriptor and parsing >>> the every tuple? That seems like it would a) be slow and b) require a >>> lot of high level code in the middle of a low-level codepath. > >> Yep, that's what it requires. It would rewrite in the new format. > > In the case of the recent hstore fixes, we were able to put the burden > on the hstore functions themselves to do any necessary conversion. > I wonder if it'd be possible to do something similar here? I haven't > chased the bits in any detail, but I'm thinking that integer timestamps > in a plausible range might all look like denormalized floats, and > conversely plausible float timestamps would look like ridiculously large > integer timestamps. Would we be willing to make such assumptions to > support in-place upgrade of timestamps? This seems like it might not be entirely reliable, which would make me disinclined to do it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: