Re: PGDG RPMS and integer-datetimes support

--- Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Because almost nobody has complained about the lack
> of it.
> (I'm talking about actual field experience of there
> being a
> problem, not somebody objecting that it sounds like
> a
> feature worth having.)
>
> It should also be pointed out that we are still
> finding bugs in
> the integer-datetimes code. This is of course
> exactly because
> it's not the default --- but I feel sure that the
> average user
> who notices a difference at all, if we change the
> default,
> will be much more likely to hit a bug than to
> benefit.

It certainly did seem like a marginal improvement, but
an improvment nontheless, back when we deployed 7.4 (I
thing the feature was introduced in 7.3). Now that
we've switched to FC3, it was a minor inconvenience to
have to rebuild the RPM just for this feature, and I
was wondering if there's been enough testing to make
it a default. Your answer clearly is "no". Allright.

I wonder if the bugs you're finding are serious enough
to warrant dumping the data and restoring it to a
version without integer-datetimes?

Thanks,
Murthy

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/