Robert Haas <> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Tom Lane <> 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 (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to