Re: Oddity with extract microseconds?

From: Harald Fuchs <hf0923x(at)protecting(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Oddity with extract microseconds?
Date: 2005-12-07 09:23:13
Message-ID: 87bqztxnum.fsf@srv.protecting.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

In article <439650F1(dot)4050901(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:

mysql> SELECT EXTRACT(MICROSECOND FROM '2003-01-02 10:30:01.00123');
>> +-------------------------------------------------------+
>> | EXTRACT(MICROSECOND FROM '2003-01-02 10:30:01.00123') |
>> +-------------------------------------------------------+
>> | 1230 |
>> +-------------------------------------------------------+
>> 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>> Does contrary behavior from MySQL count as evidence that PostgreSQL's
>> behavior is correct? :-)

> No...I happen to think that their way is more consistent though. Pity
> it's not in the spec.

I'd say the comparison with MySQL is useless because MySQL is unable
to store microseconds in a DATETIME or TIMESTAMP column, although you
can extract microseconds from a date/time literal.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Schiltknecht 2005-12-07 09:23:50 Re: Replication on the backend
Previous Message J. Andrew Rogers 2005-12-07 09:04:24 Re: Replication on the backend