Re: timestamp format bug
От | Roberts, Jon |
---|---|
Тема | Re: timestamp format bug |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1A6E6D554222284AB25ABE3229A9276271552F@nrtexcus702.int.asurion.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: timestamp format bug ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Grittner [mailto:Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov] > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:47 PM > To: Roberts, Jon; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: RE: [HACKERS] timestamp format bug > > >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:45 PM, in message > <1A6E6D554222284AB25ABE3229A92762715527@nrtexcus702.int.asurion.com>, > "Roberts, > Jon" <Jon.Roberts@asurion.com> wrote: > > > So on your db, run this query: > > select sub.t1, to_char(t1, 'yyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss.us') as char_t1 > > from > > ( > > select timestamp'2008-01-31 12:31:40.500000' as t1 > > ) sub > > > > > > I bet you get this: > > "2008-01-31 12:31:40.50";"2008-01-31 12:31:40.500000" > > t1 | char_t1 > ------------------------+---------------------------- > 2008-01-31 12:31:40.50 | 2008-01-31 12:31:40.500000 > (1 row) > > > Don't you think it should have two identical columns? > > No. Why should the return value of a function influence the input? > This is clearly a bug. Don't fix it. I don't care. Jon
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: