From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | arnaulist(at)andromeiberica(dot)com |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: index over timestamp not being used |
Date: | 2007-07-24 19:43:15 |
Message-ID: | 15140.1185306195@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Arnau <arnaulist(at)andromeiberica(dot)com> writes:
>> Alternatively, do you really need to_timestamp at all? The standard
>> timestamp input routine won't have any problem with that format:
>> t.timestamp_in >= '20070101'
> This is always I think I'm worried, what happens if one day the internal
> format in which the DB stores the date/timestamps changes. I mean, if
> instead of being stored as YYYYMMDD is stored as DDMMYYYY, should we
> have to change all the queries?
You are confusing internal storage format with the external
representation.
> I thought the
> to_char/to_date/to_timestamp functions were intented for this purposes
No, they're intended for dealing with wacky formats that the regular
input/output routines can't understand or produce.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karl Denninger | 2007-07-25 01:20:09 | Performance issue with 8.2.3 - "C" application |
Previous Message | Arnau | 2007-07-24 19:31:07 | Re: index over timestamp not being used |