Re: proposal: rounding up time value less than its unit.
| От | David Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: proposal: rounding up time value less than its unit. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwZXO8fmFyfrPmNqN22_83jdK0Km=10CwtGHZWXq49T_XQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: proposal: rounding up time value less than its unit. (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: proposal: rounding up time value less than its unit.
Re: proposal: rounding up time value less than its unit. |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Agreed- they're independent considerations and the original concern was
about the nonzero-to-zero issue, so I'd suggest we address that first,
though in doing so we will need to consider what *actual* min values we
should have for some cases which currently allow going to zero for the
special case and that, I believe, makes this all 9.5 material and allows
us a bit more freedom in deciding how to hanlde things more generally.
This is 9.5 material because 1) it isn't all that critical and, 2) we DO NOT want a system to not come up because of a GUC paring error after a minor-release update.
I don't get where we "need" to do anything else besides that...the whole "actual min values" comment is unclear to me.
My thought on rounding is simply no-complaint, no-change; round-to-nearest would be my first choice if implementing anew.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: