Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lPszW-0003J0-21 for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 20:23:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lPszV-0005nl-00 for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 20:23:33 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lPszU-0005nd-Oj for pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 20:23:32 +0000 Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lPszS-0004LP-P5 for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 20:23:31 +0000 Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lPszQ-0000Uw-Pf; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:23:28 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 16:23:28 -0400 From: Bruce Momjian To: Tim Cc: "Jonah H. Harris" , legrand legrand , posgres support Subject: Re: Creating redwood datestyle in Postgres 12 Message-ID: <20210326202328.GA6371@momjian.us> References: <5273bd68ae53e76fb592249ba05433b4bb645660.camel@cybertec.at> <20210326123555.GA18244@momjian.us> <1616777712530-0.post@n3.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 04:21:13PM -0400, Tim wrote: > Yes anything that involves management at a table level is not practical due to > the size of our database and limited amount of resources (me). I was not aware > of the orafce extension and will keep it in mind.   > > Tom, we currently are on EDB AS 12 but its becoming cost inefficient to stay > with EDB due to our scale, since their pricing reflects the size of the > production VMs that are used. So while this migration might be a pain from the > application side.. long run it would be cheaper.  > > Jonah, I'm assuming a patch would only apply per Postgres version... so any > future PG version upgrade would require a new patch? While I'm sure technically > its doable.. long run it would be more practical to just move away from these > cursed Oracle dates. Yes, you might be able to compile it yourself for each version, but if it doesn't compile, someone will have to fix it. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.