Re: Interval->day proposal

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Interval->day proposal
Date: 2005-05-30 16:40:02
Message-ID: 24387.1117471202@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Unfortunately, it appears that tri-partitioning INTERVAL ( year/month ;
> week/day ; hour/minute/second ) is a violation of the SQL spec which has only
> the two partitions ( year/month ; week/day/hour/minute/second ).

I think it's an extension of the spec, not a violation. In
particular, if you were working in a daylight-savings-less timezone,
you could not tell the difference (could you?) The spec's worldview
essentially corresponds to daylight-savings-less all the time, and
so they are already a subset of what we do.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-05-30 16:47:51 US Goverment and Patents
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-05-30 16:17:34 Re: Interval->day proposal