| From: | "Warren Turkal" <turkal(at)google(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Warren Turkal" <wturkal(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: timestamp refactor effort |
| Date: | 2008-01-14 19:33:56 |
| Message-ID: | 8c3d85470801141133y5c6a8b64i11430d96e242bc4c@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 13, 2008 9:21 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Warren Turkal" <turkal(at)google(dot)com> writes:
> > I have a question. Are the low level representations of Timestamp and
> > TimestampTZ the same?
>
> They're the same but the interpretations are different, which is why
> I think it's useful to have two typedefs as a way of documenting what
> any given value is intended to be. The argument for having a third
> typedef would be exactly the same: to help document what a value is
> intended to be.
Makes sense.
wt
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-01-14 20:39:30 | pgsql: Most recent Postgres version is 8.2.6, per report from Robert |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-01-14 19:31:04 | Re: scan.l: check_escape_warning() |