Re: timestamp ?(RE: [GENERAL] scheduling table design)

From: "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)wallace(dot)ece(dot)rice(dot)edu>
To: kaiq(at)realtyideas(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: timestamp ?(RE: [GENERAL] scheduling table design)
Date: 2000-02-26 00:02:20
Message-ID: 20000225180220.A14961@rice.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, Feb 25, 2000 at 06:25:12PM -0600, kaiq(at)realtyideas(dot)com wrote:
> oops, it's "timestamp" now (just name change).
> BTW, I remember datetime is in sql92. "timestamp" is also in sql92? why
> "timestamp" is better than "datetime" ? sql99(96) ?

Nope, DATETIME is not an SQL92 type, it's a class of types. Here's a
snip from the standard:

<datetime type> ::=
DATE
| TIME [ <left paren> <time precision> <right paren> ]
[ WITH TIME ZONE ]
| TIMESTAMP [ <left paren> <timestamp precision> <right paren> ]
[ WITH TIME ZONE ]

So the three SQL92 datetime types are DATE, TIME, and TIMESTAMP.

Ross
--
Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>
NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer
Computer and Information Technology Institute
Rice University, 6100 S. Main St., Houston, TX 77005

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message kaiq 2000-02-26 00:25:12 timestamp ?(RE: [GENERAL] scheduling table design)
Previous Message kaiq 2000-02-25 23:40:09 Re: [GENERAL] Re: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS