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

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types
Date
Msg-id AANLkTik8L2iOqm-cZCgbYLW9fsXjPG=5okByFtui2X9q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> One thing we have talked about is converting the page on read-in from
> the backend.  Since the timestamps are the same size as float or
> integer, that might be possible.

Did we have a solution for the problem that understanding which
columns are timestamps requires having a tuple descriptor and parsing
the every tuple? That seems like it would a) be slow and b) require a
lot of high level code in the middle of a low-level codepath.


--
greg


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Floating-point timestamps versus Range Types
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Creation of temporary tables on read-only standby servers