Re: Re: why unsigned numbers don't exist ?

From: Julien Jehannet <Julien(dot)Jehannet(at)SecurityKeepers(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: why unsigned numbers don't exist ?
Date: 2001-06-08 16:35:06
Message-ID: 20010608163506.A1280@SecurityKeepers.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 06:20, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Julien Jehannet writes:
>
> > Well, this is my true problem:
> > I have converted my date format into the unix time
>
> Why? There's a DATE type.

Yes, I know. I'm using the TIMESTAMP type before but there exists some few
problems with the JDBC driver.
I read that new PostgreSQL can manage the Unix format but I'm sure that is more
efficient to test just a difference of seconds (with 2 integers) than several casts with timestamps and call an function.
(I have a lot of tests of this kind)

Am I wrong ?? Furthemore, my applications must access to the Unix time format.
In your opinion, what is the best solution, int8 or numeric ??

Sincerely,

jul

--
(work) Julien.Jehannet at SecurityKeepers.com
(home) jhanet at caramail.com
'Early to rise and early to bed makes a man healthy but socially dead.'
Animaniacs, série burlesque américaine

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-08 16:40:47 Re: [GENERAL] Should Cygwin PostgreSQL contain all header files?
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-06-08 16:22:18 Re: plpython and trusted modules