Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: int64/double for time/timestamp

From: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: int64/double for time/timestamp
Date: 2005-02-25 15:25:11
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Urgh.  This is clearly a bug.  All the code in utils/adt seems to be
> correctly set up to treat TimeADT as an integral value, but then the two
> macros quoted are converting the value to float8 and back again ... so
> what's actually on disk is the float8 equivalent of what the int64 value
> is supposed to be :-(.  As long as the macros are used *consistently* to
> fetch and store time datums, no one would notice --- you could only see
> a difference if the int64 values got large enough to not be represented
> completely accurately as floats, which I believe is impossible for type
> time.
> So the fact that you're seeing a bug in btree_gist suggests that
> someplace you're cheating and bypassing the FooGetDatum/DatumGetFoo
> macros.
> We'll obviously want to fix this going forward for efficiency reasons,
> but it's an initdb-forcer because it'll change the on-disk
> representation of time columns.  So we can't change it in 8.0 or before.

So, will we do it? I can do, but I don't know: Is there a place which contains 
storage version (except file PG_VERSION)?

Teodor Sigaev                                   E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-02-25 15:26:05
Subject: Re: UTF8 or Unicode
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-25 15:23:16
Subject: Re: Where are we on stored procedures?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group