From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
Cc: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, pablopumarino(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #14294: Problem in generate series between dates |
Date: | 2016-08-31 21:33:24 |
Message-ID: | 15294.1472679204@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> "Christoph" == Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> writes:
> Christoph> To avoid DST problems, wouldn't a "date"-based
> Christoph> generate_series be the safe way to go?
> The lack of generate_series(date,date,integer) is sometimes annoying,
> even though it can be worked around using the timestamp-without-timezone
> variant of generate_series.
Or you can do it with "base_date + generate_series(integer...)".
I think we looked at this when the timestamp generate_series functions
were put in, and were worried about overloading the name so far that
common use-cases would get ambiguous-function failures. If that can
be shown not to happen, though, it'd be worth adding such a function
IMO.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2016-08-31 22:07:50 | Re: BUG #14294: Problem in generate series between dates |
Previous Message | Andrew Gierth | 2016-08-31 19:48:22 | Re: BUG #14294: Problem in generate series between dates |