Re: timestamp refactor effort - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: timestamp refactor effort
Date
Msg-id 25162.1200187413@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to timestamp refactor effort  ("Warren Turkal" <wturkal@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: timestamp refactor effort  ("Warren Turkal" <turkal@google.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Warren Turkal" <wturkal@gmail.com> writes:
> So...in the vein of my last mail, I have tried to create another patch
> for refactoring out some of the HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP ifdefs in the
> code in timestamp.c. I have attached the patch. Please let me know if
> this patch is acceptable and what I can do to continue this effort.

Hmm, PackedTime seems like a fairly random name for the type --- there's
not anything particularly "packed" about it IMO.

I'm a bit inclined to suggest just using the Timestamp typedef.
I guess though that there's some risk of confusion between values
that actually are "timestamp without time zone" and values that need
the same representation but aren't actually intended to represent a
specific point in time.

Maybe "TimeOffset" or "TimeValue" or something like that?

Other than the name game, I think you're headed in the right direction.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgresql Materialized views
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Make pg_dump suppress COMMENT ON SCHEMA public ?