Hi, everyone. Yes, according to prog file, these functions also have prorettype => timestamptz, so the should return timestamptz. 29.12.2025, 13:37, Japin Li < mailto:japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com >
On Mon, 29 Dec 2025 at 15:55, Rahila Syed < /compose rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com > wrote: > Hi, > > There are typos in return type of these functions: > 1) timestamptz_pl_interval_at_zone(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) > NOW: PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMP(timestamptz_pl_interval_internal(timestamp, > span, attimezone)); > SHOULD: > PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMPTZ(timestamptz_pl_interval_internal(timestamp, span, > attimezone)); > 2) Datum timestamptz_mi_interval_at_zone(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) > NOW: PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMP(timestamptz_mi_interval_internal(timestamp, > span, attimezone)); > SHOULD: > PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMPTZ(timestamptz_mi_interval_internal(timestamp, span, > attimezone)); > > You’re right — these are just typos, and they don’t affect correctness since both > ultimately call Int64GetDatum(). > Still, +1 for fixing them for clarity. The functions timestamptz_pl_interval() and timestamptz_mi_interval() have the same typos, right? -- Regards, Japin Li ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.