Re: [HACKERS] Postgres - Y2K Compliant....Yes or No

From: darcy(at)druid(dot)net (D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain)
To: chris_d_williams(at)itd(dot)sterling(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgres - Y2K Compliant....Yes or No
Date: 1998-10-20 01:57:38
Message-ID: m0zVR3K-0000emC@druid.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thus spake Chris Williams
> I have seen other postings about Y2K compliance of postgres but no answers. Can anyone tell me how
> compliant Postgres is?

darcy=> select 'NOW'::timestamp;
?column?
----------------------
1998-10-19 17:45:27-04
(1 row)

Now 2038 compliance is another matter. :-)

P.S. I'm sure we'll have 8 byte times by then.

--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 1998-10-20 02:17:27 Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-10-20 00:03:28 Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind