| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, 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 17:30:44 |
| Message-ID: | 8c0d8ec81c4a7684e8c4477c0a979ec2258b07ec.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2025-11-08 at 09:09 +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> 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.
I don't see the problem, but I guess that's getting severly off-topic.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-11-08 19:26:14 | Re: IO in wrong state on riscv64 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-11-08 17:06:50 | Re: pg_dump not dumping default_text_search_config WAI? |