Re: [HACKERS] Date/time types: big change

From: Karel Zak - Zakkr <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Date/time types: big change
Date: 2000-02-18 11:27:04
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.3.96.1000218120108.29793C-100000@ara.zf.jcu.cz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> I've just committed changes to "reunify" the date/time types.
> "timestamp" and "interval" are now the two primary date/time types for
> users. Also, I've changed the default date style to "ISO" (not just in
> time for Y2K, but we'll be ready for "Y3K").
>
> Also, I made some changes to have NUMERIC be a "known" type for
> purposes of implicit type coersion, but have not tested to see if the
> underlying conversion functions are available.
>
> initdb required (and enforced by a catalog version change).
>
> Regression tests pass, except for the rules test due to ongoing rules
> formatting work.

Great, you fix my formatting code for timestamp. Thanks Thomas!

But conversion timestam to 'tm' struct is not Y2038 ready
(POSIX 'tm' limitation?):

test=# select to_char('Fri Feb 18 11:57:47 2038 CET'::timestamp, 'HH:MI:SS YYYY');
to_char
---------------
10:57:47 2038
(1 row)

Or simple:

test=# select 'Fri Feb 18 11:57:47 2038 CET'::timestamp;
?column?
--------------------------
Thu Feb 18 10:57:47 2038
(1 row)

Or am I something leave out?

Karel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc Tardif 2000-02-18 11:40:40 Re: [HACKERS] queries on 2+ indices
Previous Message Karel Zak - Zakkr 2000-02-18 10:26:16 Re: [HACKERS] TODO: Cache most recent query plan