Re: Analysis Function

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: David Jarvis <thangalin(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Analysis Function
Date: 2010-06-13 15:34:20
Message-ID: 13998.1276443260@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> We could have a function like:

> construct_timestamp(year int4, month int4, date int4, hour int4, minute
> int4, second int4, milliseconds int4, timezone text)

This fails to allow specification to the microsecond level (and note
that with float timestamps even smaller fractions have potential use).
I would suggest dropping the milliseconds argument and instead letting
the seconds arg be float8. That seems a closer match to the way people
think about the textual representation.

> Now that we have named parameter notation, callers can use it to
> conveniently fill in only the fields needed:

It's not immediately obvious what the default value of "timezone"
will be?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-06-13 15:42:19 Re: Analysis Function
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2010-06-13 14:00:16 Re: Re: [PERFORM] Large (almost 50%!) performance drop after upgrading to 8.4.4?