Re: Year 2038 Bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zdenek Kotala
Subject Re: Year 2038 Bug?
Date
Msg-id 48F39200.10001@sun.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Year 2038 Bug?  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Responses Re: Year 2038 Bug?  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
David E. Wheeler napsal(a):
> On Oct 13, 2008, at 11:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
>> "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes:
>>> Probably no problem, then. Do dates in PostgreSQL work for their
>>> entire documented ranges on 32bit processors?
>>
>> As long as the C compiler supports int64 ...
> 
> I was afraid you'd say that. See:
> 
>   http://code.google.com/p/y2038/wiki/WhyBother
> 
> Especially the "64 bit CPU doesn't mean 2038 clean" section. Again, 
> maybe this doesn't apply to PostgreSQL; I'm just doing a bit of 
> diligence. :-)

PostgreSQL 8.4 uses 64bit data type for time. But if you use system timezone 
then you can get in trouble if system does not support 64bit zic files.
    Zdenek


-- 
Zdenek Kotala              Sun Microsystems
Prague, Czech Republic     http://sun.com/postgresql



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: Year 2038 Bug?
Next
From: Andrew Chernow
Date:
Subject: Re: Year 2038 Bug?