On Tue, 2024-06-11 at 00:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I'm not that thrilled with inventing a new time type just for this,
> either. However, time_t is not very fit for purpose, so do you
> have a different suggestion?
No, I don't have a great alternative, so I don't object to your
solutions for f5e4dedfa8.
Regards,
Jeff Davis