> It's the same, because the limits are calendar based (particularly,
> the Julian-date functions) and not dependent on the representation.
Hmmm? Just storing dates for the range described (until the year
294,000) takes 8bytes by my calculations. And that's without the 3
bytes for the time zone. Is my math off?
And, of course, this doesn't answer at all why time with time zone is so
huge.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
