On 2015-07-29 09:37:26 +1200, David Rowley wrote: > On 29 July 2015 at 03:25, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > On 2015-07-29 03:10:41 +1200, David Rowley wrote: > > > Have you thought about what to do when HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP is not > > defined? > > > > I don't think it's actually important. The only difference vs float > > timestamps is that in the latter case we set fsecs to zero BC. > > > > > I was also thinking that the % 10 won't work when fsec_t is double. > > typedef double fsec_t
It seems quite possible to move that bit to timestamp2tm and do it without a dependency on HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP. As long as it doesn't slow down the int timestamp case I'm happy to simplify code in this area. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
