Re: Year 2038 Bug?

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Year 2038 Bug?
Date: 2008-10-13 18:33:34
Message-ID: 5A063A54-0B35-40B6-855D-DD02BBD504F4@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Oct 13, 2008, at 11:24, Andrew Chernow wrote:

> PostgreSQL doesn't use the standard time_t and time functions for
> its timestamp types. Therefore, any limitations in regards to 64-
> bit time_t values on 32-bit platforms don't apply; other than the
> limitation Tom spoke of ... no 64-bit int.

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.

Best,

David

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdenek Kotala 2008-10-13 18:37:31 Re: Year 2038 Bug?
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2008-10-13 18:33:19 Re: Year 2038 Bug?