Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster
Date: 2017-02-19 09:49:22
Message-ID: CA+TgmoafyUzmg8T-rKEgmkX7F1iQLSrKBmqKa26EattXpMS-ng@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Thoughts? Should we double down on trying to make this work according
> to the "all integer timestamps" protocol specs, or cut our losses and
> change the specs?

I vote for doubling down. It's bad enough that we have so many
internal details that depend on this setting; letting that cascade
into the wire protocol seems like it's just letting the chaos spread
farther and wider.

Also, I wonder if we could consider deprecating and removing
--disable-integer-datetimes at some point.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-02-19 09:53:00 Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-02-19 09:43:30 Re: Reporting xmin from VACUUMs