Re: Timestamp, fractional seconds problem

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Timestamp, fractional seconds problem
Date: 2001-10-04 21:02:02
Message-ID: 3BBCCE4A.B1AE201F@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

> > ... then trailing zeros are hacked out,
> > two digits at a time.
> I was wondering why it seemed to always want to produce an even number
> of fractional digits. Why are you doing it 2 at a time and not 1?
> I should think timestamp(1) would produce 1 fractional digit, not
> two digits of which the second is always 0 ...

Hmm. Good point wrt timestamp(1). I hack out two digits at a time to get
convergence on a behavior consistant with previous releases of having
(at least) two digits of precision (not one or three). I was trying to
minimize the impact of the other changes.

Note that another "arbitrary difference" is that, by default, TIMESTAMP
is actually TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE. SQL99 specifies otherwise, but
there would seem to be fewer porting and upgrade issues for 7.2 if we
choose the current behavior.

Not sure where pg_dump and other utilities gin up the SQL9x type names,
but we should fix things during beta to be consistant.

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2001-10-04 21:18:29 Re: cvs problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-10-04 20:48:37 Re: Timestamp, fractional seconds problem

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-10-04 21:32:14 Re: Timestamp, fractional seconds problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-10-04 20:48:37 Re: Timestamp, fractional seconds problem