On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 12:11:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> More generally, nobody is maintaining ecpg's copy of the datetime code,
> and that's been true for a very long time. I'm not personally
Well, maintaining as in fixing bugs I do as I find time. Maintaining as in
keeping in sync with the backend nobody does, you're right. However, as long as
the code works and the internal data representation isn't changed or used,
that's not really a problem.
> interested in trying to re-sync that copy. It would be more useful to
> figure out a way to get rid of it. There have been past discussions of
+1
> how we could make a single copy of the code work in both backend and
> frontend contexts, but the frontend environment is so impoverished by
> comparison (no Assert, no elog, no palloc) that it hasn't looked like an
> attractive idea. It's also fairly unclear whether anyone is actually
> using ecpg's client-side datetime support, which means there's little
> motivation to put a lot of work into it.
This is an interesting question. I used to think that even ecpg is not used
very often anymore but I keep running into large scale usages from time to
time. And at least some do use pgtypeslib, too.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at googlemail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
