Re: [HACKERS] TODO list
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] TODO list |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20305.948096539@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] TODO list (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> Does this mean the abstime/reltime types or all of them? I thought the
>> former were deprecated anyway.
> abstime should probably be considered deprecated as a user type, but
> it is still used extensively internally and within the tuple
> structure. I'd be reluctant to wholesale replace it with
> timestamp/datetime, since that will take 8 bytes per value rather than
> 4.
I was meaning to ask you which of the date/time types are going to be
left standing when the dust settles. (I know you've said, but the
archives are so messed up right now that I can't find it.)
Timestamp is the only remaining standard type without an array type,
and if it's not going to be deprecated then it ought to have one...
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: