On 2015-07-29 09:37:26 +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On 29 July 2015 at 03:25, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>
> > On 2015-07-29 03:10:41 +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> > > Have you thought about what to do when HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP is not
> > defined?
> >
> > I don't think it's actually important. The only difference vs float
> > timestamps is that in the latter case we set fsecs to zero BC.
> >
> >
> I was also thinking that the % 10 won't work when fsec_t is double.
>
> typedef double fsec_t
It seems quite possible to move that bit to timestamp2tm and do it
without a dependency on HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP. As long as it doesn't slow
down the int timestamp case I'm happy to simplify code in this area.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
