Re: Looking for a doc section that presents the overload selection rules
От | Adrian Klaver |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Looking for a doc section that presents the overload selection rules |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 36e3e2a5-cf09-61e2-3f12-3ea6d17e3ccd@aklaver.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Looking for a doc section that presents the overload selection rules (Bryn Llewellyn <bryn@yugabyte.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Looking for a doc section that presents the overload selection rules
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 10/21/21 17:42, Bryn Llewellyn wrote: >> On 21-Oct-2021, at 17:15, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote: >> >> On 10/21/21 15:45, Bryn Llewellyn wrote: >>>> /Adrian Klaver wrote:/ >>>> >>> *Why is there no "date" overload of "to_char()"?* > > You've lost me entirely here, I'm afraid. > > My question was simple: why is there no "to_char ( date, text ) → text" overload? Because there is: to_char ( timestamp with time zone, text ) → text and date is a subset of timestamp(tz) where timestamptz is the preferred form. This allows you to do things like: select '10/30/21 22:00:00'::timestamptz - '10/22/21'::date; ?column? ----------------- 8 days 22:00:00 > > Without this, and as long as the good practice rule is followed to code so that implicit conversion is never invoked, thenusing "to_char()" on a "date" value requires writing an explicit typecast. There are only two possible choices: castto plain "timestamp" or cast to "timestamptz". And for reasons that I'm sure you'd explain better than I would, the choicemakes no actual difference to the outcome when a template is used that's natural for a "date" value. > > So the consequence is that you have to write cluttered code and a fairly elaborate comment to say what your intention is. Welcome to date/times. As I have said before if you are looking for end to end consistency you are in the wrong place. It is an area where specific comments are needed to explain your choices. I am not understanding the template reference as there is a difference in output between timestamp and timestamptz. > > What would you do here? Would you break the rule of practice so that you simply invoke "to_char()" on a "date" value _withoutwriting a typecast_ and then letting the implicit conversion (which we know is to "timestamptz") have its innocenteffect? > Working in timestamptz is a benefit so I'm fine with that being the default. The bottom line is that working correctly with date/times is difficult and requires effort spent studying the underlying structure. More so when you switch between systems e.g. Javascript 0 indexed months. -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: