Re: Re: [PEPr] Proposal for Database::DB_Table

Hi, Alexey,

DB_Table wants above all for the data itself to be portable across databases, not just the API calls. In a way, DB_Table proceeds similarly to MDB in this case: it retreats to the lowest common denominator in the name of portability.

Well, the problem is that 4-byte integer is *a bit* lower than the lowest common denominator...

This could be my mis-reading of the Unix timestamp standard (such as it is). My understanding was that a Unix timestamp is represented by a signed 4-byte integer (i.e., -2^31 to +2^31 -1). The DB_Table timestamp datatype is for Unix timestamps, which seems to me a reasonable lowest common denominator for time stamps given the wide range of RDBMSes. If it is the name that throws one off, I could change it to, say, DB_TABLE_UNIXTIME or something like that to make it more clear this is a Unix timestamp type and not some other timestamp type. If it is something else, though, please let me know. -- Paul M. Jones pmjones@ciaweb.net Savant: the simple alternative to Smarty. http://phpsavant.com/