On 15 August 2011 18:09, Steve Singer <ssin...@ca.afilias.info> wrote: >> Really? I find that slightly surprising, considering that a quick look >> at master's timestamp.c suggests that the choice to use the in64 >> representation over the double representation is entirely a case of >> compile time either/or. There is no apparent fall-back to the double >> representation available to binaries built without >> --disable-integer-datetimes. >> > > I *think* the default on 8.3 was float based timestamps.
Yes, it is. > If you want to upgrade a system running 8.3 (that uses float based > timestamps) in using > pg_upgrade you must compile 9.0 (or 8.4 or 9.1) with > --disable-integer-datetimes. If at some point in the future you then want > to upgrade to 9.2 with pg_upgrade you will again need to build 9.2 with > --disable-integer-datetimes. If we remove the code for floating point > representations of datetime then you won't be able to do that. I'm pretty surprised that pg_upgrade pushes that onus onto its users - for many users, the need to build their own binaries is a greater barrier to upgrading than doing a logical restore. Maybe that's simply considered a matter for package managers to worry about, but that doesn't sit well with me. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
