Re: age() function?

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: age() function?
Date: 2002-01-18 07:23:41
Message-ID: 3C47CD7D.E684F17C@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > > How come 10 mons == 9 mons 30 days?
> > Because for purposes of comparisons, type interval assumes 1 month
> > == 30 days (cf. interval_cmp_internal). Pretty grotty, I agree,
> > but it's not easy to see how to do better.
> Oh I see. Probably that's the reason why the standard does not allow
> month-and-day-mixed interval.

Right. I have it fall back to a fixed 30 days. Seems better than
disallowing it altogether...

- Thomas

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2002-01-18 07:48:10 Re: tuptoaster.c must *not* use SnapshotAny
Previous Message Philip Warner 2002-01-18 06:42:51 Re: Bug in pg_dump/restore -o