From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 14:20:44 -0500
Message-ID: <3873.1487618444@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZ5DXqWdLXCUUYPv5ByoneJohy=YaizRGQ+RFq3Cwdxng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <26788.1487455319@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+TgmoafyUzmg8T-rKEgmkX7F1iQLSrKBmqKa26EattXpMS-ng@mail.gmail.com>
<1691.1487519369@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20170220070311.gscn7ppqbwlgdpjq@alap3.anarazel.de>
<3bd3c551-8b23-45c8-27a2-97b5a922b130@2ndquadrant.com>
<20170220110456.2jupmfhxlizykmmc@alap3.anarazel.de>
<31590.1487599653@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+TgmoZ5DXqWdLXCUUYPv5ByoneJohy=YaizRGQ+RFq3Cwdxng@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> The question to be asked is whether there is still anybody out there
>> using float timestamps. I'm starting to get dubious about it myself.
> I'm wondering if it has any effect that pg_config.h.win32 says
> /* Define to 1 if you want 64-bit integer timestamp and interval support.
> (--enable-integer-datetimes) */
> /* #undef USE_INTEGER_DATETIMES */
> Whereas pg_config.h.win32 says:
> /* Define to 1 if you want 64-bit integer timestamp and interval support.
> (--enable-integer-datetimes) */
> #define USE_INTEGER_DATETIMES 1
Er, what? For me, grep finds
src/include/pg_config.h.in: 836: #undef USE_INTEGER_DATETIMES
src/include/pg_config.h.win32: 630: /* #undef USE_INTEGER_DATETIMES */
> It looks like it was commit 2169e42bef9db7e0bdd1bea00b81f44973ad83c8
> that enabled integer datetimes by default, but that commit seems to
> not to have touched the Windows build scripts. Commit
> fcf053d7829f2d83829256153e856f9a36c83ffd changed MSVC over to use
> integer datetimes by default, but I'm not clear if there's any build
> environment where we rely on config.h.win32 but not Solution.pm?
Any such build would find itself without a defined value of BLCKSZ,
to mention just one of the settings that get appended by Solution.pm.
It does look like we expect pg_config.h.win32 to be usable standalone
for libpq-only Windows compiles, but it would never work for building
the backend. (I dunno whether the libpq-only scripts still work at
all or have bitrotted, but it's irrelevant for the question at hand.)
> If not, what exactly is pg_config.h.win32 for and to what degree does it
> need to be in sync with pg_config.h.in? The list of differences
> appears to be far more extensive than the header comment at the top of
> pg_config.h.win32 would lead one to believe.
Yeah, I think the maintenance of pg_config.h.win32 has been a bit more
haphazard than one could wish.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com
Subject: Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster
In-Reply-To: <3873.1487618444@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox