Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I'd definitely be on board with just dropping the type altogether despite >> Mark's concern.
> Then I vote for that option. BTW, another possible compromise is to move abstime into a contrib module; we've always accepted that contrib modules can be held to a lower standard than core features. I'm not volunteering to do the work for that, but it's worth contemplating. Alternatively, we could turn the origin point for abstime into a pg_control field, and regard changing it as a reason for a database not being pg_upgrade'able unless it lacks any abstime columns. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers