On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 8:58 AM Rich Shepard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2025, Rob Sargent wrote: > > >> Okay. Now I'm curious: why do you write this? > > > The way I read your description of how you use these columns currently > > suggests to me that they could be handled by a single timestamp column. > > The cost/benefit of converting is another thing altogether. > > Rob, > > Since either way works I'll save the time cost of converting because my > tables will never be really large. > Virtual columns exist: have both! -- Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce. Don't boil me, I'm still alive. <Redacted> lobster!
