From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>, Gavan Schneider <pg-gts(at)snkmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Yet Another Timestamp Question: Time Defaults |
Date: | 2013-01-22 01:19:06 |
Message-ID: | 50FDE90A.6040306@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 01/21/2013 05:06 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Adrian Klaver wrote:
>
>> I see where my confusion lies. There are two proposals at work in the above:
>>
>> "Taking another tangent I would much prefer the default time to be
>> 12:00:00 for the conversion of a date to timestamp(+/-timezone)"
>>
>> "Propose: '2013-12-25'::timestamp ==> 2013-12-25 12:00:00"
>>
>> For the timestamp(alias for timestamp without time zone) case the date
>> does not change. For timestamp with time zone it might.
>
> Well, the big problem here is in trying to use either version of
> timestamp when what you really want is a date. It will be much
> easier to get the right semantics if you use the date type for a
> date.
Agreed. If I was following Gavan correctly, he wanted to have a single
timestamp field to store calender dates and datetimes. In other words to
cover both date only situations like birthdays and datetime situations
like an appointment.
>
> -Kevin
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-01-22 02:21:50 | Re: Running update in chunks? |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-01-22 01:06:11 | Re: Yet Another Timestamp Question: Time Defaults |