Re: [HACKERS] Re: date/time type changes

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Birch <sbirch(at)ironmountainsystems(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: date/time type changes
Date: 2000-01-05 04:24:52
Message-ID: 3872C794.A4751262@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Wouldn't it make more sense to rename timestamp to datetime because
> datetime is the ANSI name? Just asking.

timestamp is the SQL92 name for the date+time data type. datetime was
a name concocted by me to avoid conflicting with other possible
standard names when I first implemented the "new and improved"
date/time types. Am I missing something in my recollection??

- Thomas

--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-01-05 04:44:14 Re: [HACKERS] Re: date/time type changes
Previous Message Don Baccus 2000-01-05 01:29:44 Re: [HACKERS] Inprise/Borland releasing Interbase as Open source