Re: [HACKERS] timestamp subtraction (was Re: formatting intervals

From: Graham Davis <gdavis(at)refractions(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] timestamp subtraction (was Re: formatting intervals
Date: 2006-10-06 15:05:04
Message-ID: 452670A0.6040609@refractions.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

Great, it's nice to see that this might get rolled into one of the next
releases. Thanks,

Graham.

Tom Lane wrote:

>Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>Considering how late it is in the cycle, perhaps the change in
>>behavior should come in 8.3.
>>
>>
>
>Yeah, there's not really enough time to think through the consequences
>now. I'd like to experiment with it for 8.3 though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>

--
Graham Davis
Refractions Research Inc.
gdavis(at)refractions(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2006-10-06 15:35:01 Re: PL/pgSQL Todo, better information in errcontext from plpgsql
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-10-06 14:47:17 Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James Robinson 2006-10-06 15:31:47 SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE cannot be applied to the nullable side of an outer join
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2006-10-06 13:56:51 Re: age() vs. timestamp substraction