17.03.2016 06:27, Vitaly Burovoy:
On 2016-03-15, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:
On 3/4/16 2:56 PM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
On 3/4/16, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
I think that you should update documentation. At least description of
epoch on this page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/functions-datetime.html
Thank you very much for pointing where it is located (I saw only
"to_timestamp(TEXT, TEXT)").
I'll think how to update it.
Vitaly, have you decided how to update this yet?
Yes, there are three versions:
* remove mentioning how to get timestamptz from UNIX stamp;
* leave a note how to get timestamptz and add a note that such
encapsulation existed prior to 9.6;
* replace to the proposed current behavior (without interval).
I decided to implement the third case (but a result there has a time
zone which can be different, so the result can be not exactly same for
a concrete user). If a committer decides to do somehow else, he is
free to choose one from the list above or to do something else.
3. (nitpicking) I don't sure about "4STAMPS" suffix. "4" is nice
abbreviation, but it seems slightly confusing to me.
It doesn't matter for me what it is called, it is short enough and
reflects a type on which it is applied.
What would the best name be for it?
Anastasia, any suggestions for a better name, or just leave it as is?
I'm not in favor of the "4", either. I think I would prefer
JULIAN_MAXYEAR_STAMP.
It turns out that Tom has changed almost one third of timestamp.h and
now the constant has a name "TIMESTAMP_END_JULIAN".
I've rebased the patch to the current master (5db5146) and changed it
according to the new timestamp.h.
Now it passes both versions (integer and float timestamps).
I deleted test for the upper boundary for integer timestamps, changed
a little comments.
I decided to delete hints about minimum and maximum allowed values
because no one type has such hint.
Please find attached a new version of the patch.
I think, I should write something as a reviewer.
I read the patch again and I don't see any issues with it.
It applies to the master and works as expected. So I'll mark it as
"Ready for committer"
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
