From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Integer datetimes |
Date: | 2007-05-06 17:09:40 |
Message-ID: | 200705061709.l46H9e212879@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby wrote:
> On May 5, 2007, at 10:38 AM, Neil Conway wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 11:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I'm not necessarily opposed to changing the default configure
> >> selection,
> >> but I am opposed to removing the FP code entirely.
> >
> > I would be satisfied with changing the default to integer and
> > deprecating the FP code (but keeping it around as a configure option).
> > Are there any objections to doing this for 8.3?
>
> One question... I've always assumed that FP date times suffers from
> the inexact math issues that floats do; is that true?
>
> The only use I can think of for huge date values would be astronomy.
> I know they deal with huge numbers, so maybe huge times as well. If
> there is that kind of demand perhaps we'd want to continue supporting
> FP dates... maybe via contrib, or as a different base data type.
Also, are we sure we can load a dump that used the float format? What
happens for a date out of int8 range?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-05-06 17:21:37 | Re: psqlodbc - psqlodbc: Put Autotools-generated files into subdirectory |
Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2007-05-06 16:25:16 | Re: psqlodbc - psqlodbc: Put Autotools-generated files into subdirectory |