From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Why *exactly* is date_trunc() not immutable ? |
Date: | 2007-02-19 09:58:50 |
Message-ID: | 20070219095850.GC30737@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 10:36:36AM +0100, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 10:16:12AM +0100, Alban Hertroys wrote:
>
> > What I'm trying to say is not that it _is_ immutable, but that it
> > _behaves_ immutable (under said conditions).
> >
> > This could imply that if a certain condition is available in a query on
> > which such a function operates, it would behave immutable.
> That is precisely why I didn't get the idea upfront that
> date_trunc() wouldn't be immutable just so.
>
> I'll solve it with a date_trunc_utc() wrapper.
It should be noted the date_truc(timestamptz) is not immutable, whereas
date_trunc(timestamp) is. Thus you should be able to make an index on:
date_trunc( timestamptz_column AT TIME ZONE 'UTC', 'foo' )
OTOH, if you're only storing times in UTC, then timestamp without
timezone might be better anyway.
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Primero Segundo | 2007-02-19 10:19:48 | RE: Postgresql 8.1 y Debian [ Era: Re: postgreSQL ] |
Previous Message | Karsten Hilbert | 2007-02-19 09:36:36 | Re: Why *exactly* is date_trunc() not immutable ? |