From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: time_stamp type |
Date: | 2008-07-06 05:19:19 |
Message-ID: | 23532.1215321559@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Stephen R. van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl> writes:
> What's the deal with this type?
It's a domain over timestamptz, as required by the SQL spec definition
of the information_schema.
postgres=# \dD information_schema.time_stamp
List of domains
Schema | Name | Type | Modifier | Check
--------------------+------------+-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+-------
information_schema | time_stamp | timestamp(2) with time zone | default ('now'::text)::timestamp(2) with time zone |
(1 row)
[ re-reads spec... ] Hm, actually the spec is self-contradictory here:
SQL99 20.7 saith
CREATE DOMAIN TIME_STAMP AS TIMESTAMP (2)
DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(2);
which appears to imply that TIME_STAMP is a domain over timestamp
*without* time zone ... but that is contradicted by the specification
that the default is CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, which yields a value *with*
time zone. (LOCALTIMESTAMP is the function that should have been
mentioned if they really meant without time zone.)
[ pokes further... ] Hmm, last year's SQL200n draft saith
CREATE DOMAIN TIME_STAMP AS TIMESTAMP(2) WITH TIME ZONE;
with no mention of a default. I do wish these people could make
up their minds.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-06 05:29:42 | Re: CommitFest rules |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-06 04:51:45 | Re: [PATCHES] Solaris ident authentication using unix domain sockets |