| From: | Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Date/time types: big change |
| Date: | 2000-02-16 18:37:57 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.02A.10002161931360.16403-100000@Svala.DoCS.UU.SE |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> I've just committed changes to "reunify" the date/time types.
> "timestamp" and "interval" are now the two primary date/time types for
> users. Also, I've changed the default date style to "ISO" (not just in
> time for Y2K, but we'll be ready for "Y3K").
I still don't like our Y2038 status. ;)
Anyway, the question I have is what did you do with functions such as
datetimein() or comparison functions and such for the old types? Did you
remove them? What if some, say, user-defined trigger function uses them?
The reason I'm asking is that I would like to see the floating point types
converted to SQL in a similar fashion, but when I rename, say, float4eq to
realeq it might break user applications. Or not? This is all hypothetical
of course.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-02-16 18:55:14 | Re: [HACKERS] Date/time types: big changeu |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-02-16 17:41:23 | Date/time types: big change |