| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: to_char_at_timezone()? |
| Date: | 2014-11-05 00:04:28 |
| Message-ID: | 5459698C.9040903@joh.to |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/5/14, 12:59 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> writes:
>> So I got into thinking whether it would make sense to provide a new
>> function, say, to_char_at_timezone() to solve this problem. For example:
>> ...
>> Any thoughts? The patch is quite trivial.
>
> I'm not convinced that it's all that trivial. Is the input timestamp or
> timestamptz, and what's the semantics of that exactly (ie what timezone
> rotation happens)? One's first instinct is often wrong in this area.
In my example, the input is a "timestamptz", and the output is converted
to the target time zone the same way timestamptz_out() does, except
based on the input timezone instead of TimeZone.
Not sure whether it would make sense to do this for "timestamp", or
whether there's even a clear intuitive behaviour there.
.marko
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa | 2014-11-05 00:11:40 | Re: Repeatable read and serializable transactions see data committed after tx start |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-11-04 23:59:00 | Re: to_char_at_timezone()? |