> > To quote a friend of mine, "Efficiency is an issue only when
> > inefficiency is a problem." But still, you want to be as
> > efficient as possible, right? In retrospec, it would have
> > been more efficient to store all four digits of the year, right?
> Actually, it would simply have postponed the problem to a later
> date...
*rolf* Good point. And I'd like to mention that Postgres *is* Y10K
compliant, for those needing to plan ahead :)
- Tom
