From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Incorrect handling of timezones with extract |
Date: | 2013-03-12 20:02:10 |
Message-ID: | 513F89C2.3030005@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> The behavior of timestamp-plus-interval is certainly supported by that
> argument, but I'm less convinced about timestamp-minus-timestamp. The
> raw result of the timestamp subtraction here is 71 hours (not the normal
> 72). Perhaps it should be outputting it that way instead of converting
> to "2 days 23 hours", which is arguably inaccurate.
Probably, yes. We added a barrier so that interval is supposed to be
years-months | weeks-days | hours-minutes-seconds-ms-ns. However, it
sounds like we missed a few cases.
Mind you, there's a kind of insurmountable issue with timestamp
subtraction, where you can come up with *lots* of cases where timestamp
subtraction is not reversable due to the way we handle intervalization.
Realistically, we'd need to have something like a ts_sub( tstz, tstz,
interval ) function to have a 100% reversible option. That probably
contributes to why Oracle has never supported timestamp - timestamp.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex | 2013-03-12 20:05:10 | Display output file name in psql prompt? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-03-12 19:11:27 | Re: Column defaults for foreign tables (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables) |