From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Enable integer datetimes by default |
Date: | 2007-05-06 04:08:33 |
Message-ID: | 1178424513.18303.139.camel@goldbach |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 22:49 -0500, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> Would it make more sense to have phrase it in the positive sense?
> i.e., --enable-floating-point-datetimes? I guess that's a bit longer,
> but it says what you're doing, rather than what you're *not* doing.
I think the primary reason people will want to use FP-based datetimes is
because they can't use integer-based datetimes for compatibility reasons
(e.g. no OS support for 64-bit integers, or they need to remain
compatible with old applications). The situation is analogous to
--without-spinlocks: we could call that --enable-slow-locking or
something, but that would sound like we're enabling an additional
feature.
It would also mean there would be an implicit relationship between
"--enable-integer-datetimes" and "--enable-fp-datetimes" (at most one
can be true). IMHO it would be simpler to just keep a single boolean
variable ("integer datetimes enabled or not").
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-05-06 04:20:35 | Re: Enable integer datetimes by default |
Previous Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2007-05-06 03:49:19 | Re: Enable integer datetimes by default |