Re: proposal: simple date constructor from numeric values

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: simple date constructor from numeric values
Date: 2013-07-03 16:43:35
Message-ID: CAFj8pRDJo628j_Qj1PvceHLToGWT-rFRfxt4pqe9M71ggrcxNg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2013/7/3 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:
> Peter Eisentraut escribió:
>> On 7/1/13 3:47 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION construct_time(hour int DEFAULT 0, mi int
>> > DEFAULT 0, sec int DEFAULT 0, ms float DEFAULT 0.0);
>>
>> If we are using integer datetime storage, we shouldn't use floats to
>> construct them.
>
> I think this is wrong. Datetime storage may be int, but since they're
> microseconds underneath, we'd be unable to specify a full-resolution
> timestamp if we didn't have float ms or integer µs. So either the
> seconds argument should allow fractions (probably not a good idea), or
> we should have another integer argument for microseconds (not
> milliseconds as the above signature implies).

so make_time(hour int, mi int, sec int, usec int DEFAULT 0)

Is good for all ?

Regards

Pavel

>
> --
> Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-07-03 17:03:38 Re: proposal: simple date constructor from numeric values
Previous Message Robert Haas 2013-07-03 16:36:26 Re: Add regression tests for COLLATE