Re: Exposing the stats snapshot timestamp to SQL

From: Matt Kelly <mkellycs(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Exposing the stats snapshot timestamp to SQL
Date: 2015-01-30 04:35:38
Message-ID: CA+KcUkiR+54mX1528tTAZx4PeCeqrYax7gdv3ANL1y1hfKT6Ww@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Matt Kelly <mkellycs(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Jim, I'm not sure I understand what you mean? This new function follows
> > the same conventions as everything else in the file. TimestampTz is
> just a
> > typedef for int64.
>
> ... or double. Have you checked that the code behaves properly with
> --disable-integer-timestamps?
>
> regards, tom lane
>

Well, yes int or double. I should have been more clear about that. Its a
good point though that I should run the server with disable for
completeness.
I presume you meant --disable-integer-datetimes. I just ran that test case
now, all set.

For my own edification, was there really any risk of something so trivial
breaking due to that setting, or was it just for completeness? (which is a
perfectly valid reason)

Thanks,
- Matt K.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-01-30 05:07:22 Re: Exposing the stats snapshot timestamp to SQL
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-01-30 04:07:09 Re: Safe memory allocation functions