From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly(dot)burovoy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Supporting +-Infinity values by to_timestamp(float8) |
Date: | 2016-03-15 19:28:36 |
Message-ID: | 56E86264.1000800@pgmasters.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/4/16 2:56 PM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
> On 3/4/16, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>
>> I think that you should update documentation. At least description of
>> epoch on this page:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/functions-datetime.html
>
> Thank you very much for pointing where it is located (I saw only
> "to_timestamp(TEXT, TEXT)").
> I'll think how to update it.
Vitaly, have you decided how to update this yet?
>> 3. (nitpicking) I don't sure about "4STAMPS" suffix. "4" is nice
>> abbreviation, but it seems slightly confusing to me.
>
> It doesn't matter for me what it is called, it is short enough and
> reflects a type on which it is applied.
> What would the best name be for it?
Anastasia, any suggestions for a better name, or just leave it as is?
I'm not in favor of the "4", either. I think I would prefer
JULIAN_MAXYEAR_STAMP.
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-03-15 19:39:38 | Re: Default Roles |
Previous Message | Robins Tharakan | 2016-03-15 19:18:47 | pgbench -C -M prepared gives an error |