Re: integer datetimes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

OK, mention removed.  We can always re-add it if we find we need to warn
people away from integer timestamps again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 12:38:12PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> > >
> > >>Our docs for the integer datetime option says:
> > >>Note also that the integer datetimes
> > >>code is newer than the floating-point code, and we still find bugs in it
> > >>from time to time.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >>Is the last sentence about bugs really true anymore? At least the
> > >>buildfarm
> > >>seems to have a lot *more* machines with it enabled than without.
> > >>
> > >
> > >Buildfarm proves only that the regression tests don't expose any bugs,
> > >not that there aren't any.
> > >
> > >
> > >>(I'm thinking about making it the defautl for the vc++ build, which is
> > >>why I came across that)
> > >>
> > >
> > >FWIW, there are several Linux distros that build their RPMs that way,
> > >so it's not like people aren't using it.  But it seems like we find bugs
> > >in the datetime/interval stuff all the time, as people trip over
> > >different weird edge cases.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I think it's disappointing, to say the least, that we treat this code as
> > a sort of second class citizen. BTW, the buildfarm has a majority of
> > machines using it by design - it's in the default set of options in the
> > distributed config file. If we think there are bugs we haven't found,
> > then we need to engage in some sort of analytical effort to isolate
> > them. I don't see any reason in principle why this code should be any
> > more buggy than the float based datetimes, and I see plenty of reason in
> > principle why we should make sure it's right.
>
> That was exactly what I thought, which is why I was kinda surprised to
> see that note in the configure stuff.
>
> If we go with that, then we can say that *any* new feature is less
> tested, no? ;-)
>
> //Magnus
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
>
>                 http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>          http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Index: doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.282
diff -c -c -r1.282 installation.sgml
*** doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml    3 Feb 2007 23:01:06 -0000    1.282
--- doc/src/sgml/installation.sgml    17 Feb 2007 01:24:57 -0000
***************
*** 965,973 ****
           the full range (see
           <![%standalone-include[the documentation about datetime datatypes]]>
           <![%standalone-ignore[<xref linkend="datatype-datetime">]]>
!          for more information).  Note also that the integer datetimes code is
!          newer than the floating-point code, and we still find bugs in it from
!          time to time.
          </para>
         </listitem>
        </varlistentry>
--- 965,971 ----
           the full range (see
           <![%standalone-include[the documentation about datetime datatypes]]>
           <![%standalone-ignore[<xref linkend="datatype-datetime">]]>
!          for more information).
          </para>
         </listitem>
        </varlistentry>