| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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: | 2017-02-22 06:10:35 |
| Message-ID: | fece0003-6ede-ca8b-8f26-3c6fa899583d@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/20/17 5:04 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-02-20 11:58:12 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> That being said, I did wonder myself if we should just deprecate float
>> timestamps as well.
>
> I think we need a proper deprecation period for that, given that the
> conversion away will be painful for pg_upgrade using people with big
> clusters. So I think we should fix this regardless... :(
I wounder if a separate "floatstamp" data type might fit the bill there.
It might not be completely seamless, but it would be binary compatible.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vaishnavi Prabakaran | 2017-02-22 06:14:28 | Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2017-02-22 05:59:09 | Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster |