| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "John D(dot) Burger" <john(at)mitre(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Timestamp precision |
| Date: | 2007-03-29 19:31:56 |
| Message-ID: | 29590.1175196716@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"John D. Burger" <john(at)mitre(dot)org> writes:
> Hmm, except if the timestamp "anchor" is installation-specific, then
> binary exchange of timestamps is complicated.
Yeah, that would be a problem.
> What does libpq do now
> with timetamps, if the client requests data in binary form? How does
> the client know whether it's getting floats or integers?
You have to look at the integer_datetimes parameter (which is available
to the client automatically in recent versions, though whether you can
get at it easily depends on your client library...)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joseph S | 2007-03-29 19:37:44 | Re: Slow sequential scans on one DB but not another; fragmentation? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-03-29 19:24:21 | Re: Oracle to PSQL function |