Hi Jamie, This looks like a bug - UNSIGNED_TIMESTAMP should have a unique sql type. Would you mind filing a JIRA? Thanks, James
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > Your observation that UNSIGNED_DATE and UNSIGNED_TIMESTAMP share a common > sql type is correct, at least on the 4.2 branch and on master. > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Jamie Murray <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> I am looking to find documentation on the integer representation used by >> Phoenix for its data types listed here: >> http://phoenix.apache.org/language/datatypes.html >> >> >> >> Here is what I have found so far, this came from a combination of java.sql >> types for the non-unsigned types and some phoenix investigation for the >> unsigned types. >> >> >> >> -6 --> TINYINT >> >> 5 --> SMALLINT >> >> 4 --> INTEGER >> >> -5 --> BIGINT >> >> 6 --> FLOAT >> >> 8 --> DOUBLE >> >> 3 --> DECIMAL >> >> 16 --> BOOLEAN >> >> 91 --> DATE >> >> 92 --> TIME >> >> 93 --> TIMESTAMP >> >> 12 --> VARCHAR >> >> 1 --> CHAR >> >> -2 --> BINARY >> >> -3 --> VARBINARY >> >> 9 --> UNSIGNED_INT >> >> 10 --> UNSIGNED_LONG >> >> 11 --> UNSIGNED_TINYINT >> >> 13 --> UNSIGNED_SMALLINT >> >> 14 --> UNSIGNED_FLOAT >> >> 15 --> UNSIGNED_DOUBLE >> >> 18 --> UNSIGNED_TIME >> >> 19 --> UNSIGNED_DATE >> >> 19 --> UNSIGNED_TIMESTAMP >> >> >> >> As you can see I am actually getting the same value for UNSIGNED_DATE and >> UNSIGNED_TIMESTAMP, is this intended? Or am I getting incorrect >> information. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Jamie > >
