From: | Jasen Betts <jasen(at)xnet(dot)co(dot)nz> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Fractions of seconds in timestamps |
Date: | 2012-04-25 09:25:32 |
Message-ID: | jn8fuc$oj6$1@reversiblemaps.ath.cx |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2012-04-25, Valentin Militaru <valentin(dot)militaru(at)telcor(dot)ro> wrote:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --------------050404030901030607030308
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> What about using
>
> WHERE f BETWEEN '2012-04-23 00:00:00' AND '2012-04-24 00:00:00'?
>
that could match the first microsecond of 2012-04-24
otherwise not a prolem :)
another option is BETWEEN '2012-04-23 00:00:00' AND '2012-04-23 23:59:60'
or even BETWEEN '2012-04-23 00:00:00' AND '2012-04-23 23:59:60.999999'
these are reliant on documented behaviours, but documented
inosyncratic behaviours, behaviours that could potentially be improved.
such that it woulkd no longer be reliable.
>> you have to do it the long way
>>
>> f>= '2012-04-23 00:00:00' AND f< '2012-04-24 00:00:00'
>>
this way is mathematically correct and relies on standard guaranteed
behaviours only.
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Toby Corkindale | 2012-04-25 09:42:39 | Re: Bug? Query plans / EXPLAIN using gigabytes of memory |
Previous Message | Willy-Bas Loos | 2012-04-25 09:16:50 | Re: Bug? Query plans / EXPLAIN using gigabytes of memory |