Re: ago(interval) → timestamptz

From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Florents Tselai <florents(dot)tselai(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ago(interval) → timestamptz
Date: 2025-11-08 08:09:55
Message-ID: 64af9562-9e4f-4363-a7b0-4b6249a8de43@proxel.se
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/6/25 3:54 PM, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-11-06 at 12:15 +0100, Florents Tselai wrote:
>>> I don't get what users would need ago(interval) -> timestamp. That function would
>>> not make any sense since there is no equivalent to now() which returns timestamp,
>>> simply because a timestamp does not refer to any specific point in time and can
>>> only be interpreted with some additional piece of information like a time zone.
>>
>> I agree that only a timestamptz variant makes sense.
>
> Lots of people model absolute time using "timestamp without time zone" with the
> silent assumption that all such timestamps are UTC timestamps. That would be
> the additional piece of information.
>
> But I admit that that makes date arithmetic less useful.
>
> There is an equivalent for "now()": localtimestamp

Oh, did not know of that function but using timestamp like this is
dangerous and a bad idea. Let's not make life easier for people who
misuse data types. The localtimestamp function should not have been
introduced in the first place.

Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Karlsson 2025-11-08 08:57:13 Re: display hot standby state in psql prompt
Previous Message cca5507 2025-11-08 07:59:02 Use bsearch() instead of a manual binary search in syscache.c