Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ecmascript 5 DATESTYLE

From: ben hockey <neonstalwart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mike Fowler <mike(at)mlfowler(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ecmascript 5 DATESTYLE
Date: 2011-12-06 20:26:12
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 12/6/2011 3:20 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I am for ECMA datestyle
> it is there but just is not public, if I remember well
> Theoretically some custom output/input transform routine can be very
> interesting - for domains, for boolean type - but on second hand - the
> usage of this feature is minimal and there is risk for less advanced
> users - so ECMA datestyle is very adequate solution.
> Regards
> Pavel
i don't particularly need anything other than ECMA datestyle - i was 
just under the impression that a more generic solution was preferred.  
so, ECMA is enough to stop me from making any more noise about this.

pavel, is there a way i can use this currently?  if not, would it take 
much effort to make this public?



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2011-12-06 20:53:05
Subject: Re: ecmascript 5 DATESTYLE
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-12-06 20:25:11
Subject: Re: WIP: SP-GiST, Space-Partitioned GiST

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group