| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Adrian Klaver" <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Steve Crawford" <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Gavan Schneider" <pg-gts(at)snkmail(dot)com>,pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Yet Another Timestamp Question: Time Defaults |
| Date: | 2013-01-22 01:06:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20130122010611.120620@gmx.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Adrian Klaver wrote:
> I see where my confusion lies. There are two proposals at work in the above:
>
> "Taking another tangent I would much prefer the default time to be
> 12:00:00 for the conversion of a date to timestamp(+/-timezone)"
>
> "Propose: '2013-12-25'::timestamp ==> 2013-12-25 12:00:00 "
>
> For the timestamp(alias for timestamp without time zone) case the date
> does not change. For timestamp with time zone it might.
Well, the big problem here is in trying to use either version of
timestamp when what you really want is a date. It will be much
easier to get the right semantics if you use the date type for a
date.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2013-01-22 01:19:06 | Re: Yet Another Timestamp Question: Time Defaults |
| Previous Message | Tim Uckun | 2013-01-22 01:02:58 | Re: Running update in chunks? |