Re: [HACKERS] TODO list
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] TODO list |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0001180146070.411-100000@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] TODO list (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2000-01-17, Thomas Lockhart mentioned: > > The official SQL data types are "timestamp" and > > "interval", right? Everything else will eventually be an alias or > > phased out or whatever? > > No (at least I haven't proposed that). abstime stays as a 4-byte > internal system time type. timestamp and interval become full-featured > date/time types, stealing all of the datetime and timespan code, and > the latter two become synonyms for timestamp and interval. Okay, so we have "timestamp" and "interval" as offical types, a few "datetime" sort of things as aliases for backwards compatibility, and "abstime" as a more or less internal type with less precision and storage requirements. Sounds clear to me. This also puts the original TODO item into a much clearer light. > > I've been itching to change the pg_shadow.valuntil column to timestamp > > anyway, I suppose that would be a step in the right direction, or not? > > At the moment, there are *no* 8-byte date/time types in the system > tables. This would be the first instance of that, and I'm not sure we > should introduce it in just one place. > > Has abstime been a problem here? No. I just thought this could be done, but in view of your explanation I am now wiser ... -- Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115 peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: