According to http://bsonspec.org/spec.html there are indeed 2 different types
"\x09" e_name int64 UTC datetime "\x11" e_name int64 Timestamp I would guess that you need 2 different (sub)classes in Pharo if you want to honour this spec. It has little to do with the almost empty TimeStamp subclass of DateAndTime having been removed. This is an API design issue (decide on the Pharo to BSON type mapping). > On 04 Dec 2015, at 16:40, Henrik Johansen <henrik.s.johan...@veloxit.no> > wrote: > > >> On 04 Dec 2015, at 3:49 , Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Yes I think… I still do not update voyage to Pharo5 (there are not >> TimeStamps anymore). >> >> Esteban >> >>> On 04 Dec 2015, at 15:43, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Does it make sense to have >>> >>> Name: ConfigurationOfVoyageMongo-EstebanLorenzano.38 >>> Author: EstebanLorenzano >>> Time: 9 May 2015, 8:40:27.23963 am >>> UUID: 9ba71817-b3f9-4f66-8579-e09e5deb5935 >>> Ancestors: ConfigurationOfVoyageMongo-EstebanLorenzano.37 >>> >>> fixed a problem with the versionner tool >>> >>> in the Catalog for Pharo 40? >>> >>> Stef >>> >> >> > > I found this to be kind of a big deal when trying to remove deprecations in > 4.0, as TimeStamps and DateAndTime are mapped to different BSON classes... > If you change Documents to use DateAndTime now instead of Timestamp now, and > write them to a legacy database, they will save just fine, but Mongo will > give errors if you try to sort documents by that field due to incompatible > types. :/ > > Cheers, > Henry
