Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types
Date
Msg-id 4CBB6143.6050302@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types
List pgsql-hackers

On 10/17/2010 04:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> At the earliest, we could consider dropping them when we drop support
> for in-place upgrade from 8.3 --- not only direct upgrade, but through
> multiple pg_upgrade steps.  That's assuming that we think there are
> no users who are depending on float timestamps for functionality (they
> have a wider range than int timestamps don't they?).

Yes, they do.


Maybe we need to look at providing a bigtimestamp type or similar at 
some stage. Or maybe the demand for it would be so low it should be an 
add-on module.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: extensible enums