Re: timestamp format bug

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Jon Roberts" <Jon(dot)Roberts(at)asurion(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: timestamp format bug
Date: 2008-01-31 15:48:13
Message-ID: 47A1995D.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 9:34 AM, in message
<1A6E6D554222284AB25ABE3229A92762715521(at)nrtexcus702(dot)int(dot)asurion(dot)com>, "Roberts,
Jon" <Jon(dot)Roberts(at)asurion(dot)com> wrote:
> select to_char(date, 'yyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss.ms') as char,
> date
> from (select timestamp'2008-01-30 15:06:21.560' as date) sub
>
> "2008-01-30 15:06:21.560";"2008-01-30 15:06:21.56"
>
> These two fields should be consistent because they should be formatted
> the same way.

Why would you think that?

I would expect the timestamp to be presented with one to nine
digits to the right of the decimal point, depending on the value.

I can think of a couple database products which only go to three
decimal positions, and always show three, but that's hardly a
standard.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hubert FONGARNAND 2008-01-31 15:50:14 Re: BUG: type of "xxxx" does not match that when preparing the plan
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-01-31 15:35:08 Re: BUG: type of "xxxx" does not match that when preparing the plan