Thanks for starting the data collection. But keep in mind that *nix is not everything and there are other languages or platforms, where epoch may require a conversion. That's not as easy as it looks at the first glance.
________________________________ Von: Wilm Schumacher Gesendet: 23.08.2013 22:59 An: [email protected] Betreff: Re: 回复：AW: Datetime data type in Thrift? Hi, at first: I'm new to thrift. Thus I maybe do not understand the design patterns of thrift and thus cannot understand the problems Ben Craig pointed out. However, I want to disagree and would suggest a solution. If a descision is made, of course I would help to implement. If one complain one have to make it better ;). My suggestion: the unix timestamp. It would be a i64 in thrift. Am 23.08.2013 20:14, schrieb Jens Geyer: > Agree. A few points again, though. > > • double or i64 for the wire format, depending on whats best for the > majority of languages. Strings or smaller ints are obviously not > suitable. well. Long would work. > • the wire format needs a well-defined null point, which would be a monday in 1970. > depending on whats > best for the majority of languages, so that the need for rebasing a > timestamp from one system into another can be avoided as much as > possible here I would disagree. The thrift community is a community on it's own. It can make an impact on making the existing and good standard more ... standard ;). Every modern operating system is more or less POSIX, and thus has the "time" function from c (POSIX level 1), thus every language can achieve the unix timestamp. The rest is a little conversion to the nativ format. > • interpretation of the timestamp value (utc? time zone offsets? > summer/winter?) is to be handled by application. That's nothing > thrift should do. agreed. > • how about time spans? this is a question of application logic, not a problem thrift has to encounter. If you have: struct Example { 1: i32 id; 2: datetime start; 3: datetime end; }; or struct Example { 1: i32 id; 2: datetime start 3: datetime duration }; should be the same for thrift. It's a question of logic in the application. > • for the reasons above, especially the first two points, I suggest > that we first try to find out what time system should be used for the > wire format by collecting the preferred ones for each language done ;). And for the thread author: I would go with i64 and just use the time() function (or equivalent functions) and other related methods. Best Wilm ps: and 2038 it should be changed anyway ;)
