From: | Ludwig Lim <lud_nowhere_man(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomasz Myrta <jasiek(at)klaster(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Mailing List <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: TIME vs. TIMESTAMP data type |
Date: | 2003-02-06 12:08:51 |
Message-ID: | 20030206120851.54519.qmail@web80301.mail.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Hi Tomasz:
--- Tomasz Myrta <jasiek(at)klaster(dot)net> wrote:
>
> Probably you are right, but you can cast into
> timestamp before using these functions.
> Do you really need to care amount of storage?
I was just thinking if both TIMESTAMP and TIME have
use the same amount of space (I was think TIME might
use less space since it doesn't need to store month,
year, day as compared to TIMESTAMP), and TIMESTAMP
have more functions and is easier to cast, I might as
well use TIMESTAMP.
> Don't forget about INTERVAL type, which is very
> useful for time calculations.
>
--> I'll check that one out.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christoph Haller | 2003-02-06 12:12:29 | Re: Lock timeout detection in postgres 7.3.1 |
Previous Message | Maurício Sessue Otta | 2003-02-06 12:06:32 | Trigger para fazer log |