Re: Timestamp precission question

From: Adriana Alfonzo <adriana(dot)alfonzo(at)venalum(dot)com(dot)ve>
To: Vaclav TVRDIK <tvrdik(at)i3(dot)cz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Timestamp precission question
Date: 2008-11-11 19:56:28
Message-ID: 4919E36C.2000706@venalum.com.ve
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Por favor no quiero seguir recibiendo mensajes

Vaclav TVRDIK escribió:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Hm, I can't replicate that here --- but if you're using floating-point
>> timestamps, as is default in 8.3, then a certain amount of
>> machine-dependent roundoff fuzziness is not surprising.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>>
> Column is defined in such way:
> CREATE_DAT timestamp not null default now(),
>
> but in my opinion the value is already stored in the column and then my
> query should return same texts because they do display the same value in
> the same format, shouldn't they ?
>
> Thank you
> Vaclav Tvrdik
>
>

Aviso Legal Este mensaje puede contener informacion de interes solo para CVG Venalum. Solo esta permitida su copia, distribucion o uso a personas autorizadas. Si recibio este corre por error, por favor destruyalo. Eventualmentew los correos electonicos pueden ser alterados. Al respecto, CVG Venalum no se hace responsable por los errores que pudieran afectar al mensaje original.

Attachment Content-Type Size
adriana_alfonzo.vcf text/x-vcard 293 bytes

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-11-11 20:16:13 Re: Timestamp precission question
Previous Message Adriana Alfonzo 2008-11-11 19:56:12 Re: Very slow queries w/ NOT IN preparation (seems like a bug, test case)