| From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <wieck(at)debis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: TO_CHAR() |
| Date: | 1999-10-02 14:48:11 |
| Message-ID: | 37F61B2B.FBE8F847@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> If incorporating into main tree, don't forget that TO_CHAR()
> must also be capable to handle NUMERIC/DECIMAL/INTEGER with a
> rich set of fomatting styles. Actually I'm in doubt if you
> both are a little too much focusing on DATE/TIME.
> This means that there could be different input arguments
> (type and number!) to TO_CHAR().
Not a problem. In some cases, we are only an alias away from having it
(e.g. to_char(int) == text(int4)). Not sure about *all* of the others,
but the ugliest will be the to_char(datetime) and to_date(text,format)
stuff, so that is a good place to start.
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-10-02 15:00:23 | Re: [HACKERS] Tricky query, tricky response |
| Previous Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 1999-10-02 11:25:05 | Re: [HACKERS] postmaster dead on startup from unportable SSL patch |