Over in the "Keeping pg_recvlogical's "feTimestamp" separate from
TimestampTz"...
On 2/17/17 12:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I am not sure that it was really a good design to pretend that the
> replication protocol is independent of --disable-integer-datetimes
> when the underlying WAL stream most certainly isn't.
Ok, I'll open the can of worms...
- Should replication be changed to obey --disable-integer-datetimes?
- Should we consider formally deprecating FP timestamps, starting with
no longer supporting SR?
While #2 may sound rather severe, I'm wondering if a different datatype
for timestamps stored as floats would ease that pain.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
