Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster
Date: 2017-02-28 01:13:32
Message-ID: 20170228011332.afd5x35pftvwkxbd@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2017-02-27 17:00:23 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 02/22/2017 02:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > > On 2017-02-22 08:43:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > (To be concrete, I'm suggesting dropping --disable-integer-datetimes
> > > > in HEAD, and just agreeing that in the back branches, use of replication
> > > > protocol with float-timestamp servers is not supported and we're not
> > > > going to bother looking for related bugs there. Given the lack of field
> > > > complaints, I do not believe anyone cares.)
> >
> > What I *am* willing to spend time on is removing float-timestamp code
> > in HEAD. I've not yet heard anybody speak against doing that (or at
> > least, nothing I interpreted as a vote against it). If I've not heard
> > any complaints by tomorrow, I'll get started on that.
>
> Rip it out!

Already happened: https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=b6aa17e0ae367afdcea07118e016111af4fa6bc3

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2017-02-28 01:33:34 Backend crash on non-exclusive backup cancel
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2017-02-28 01:00:23 Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster