Re: timestamp format bug
От | Kevin Grittner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: timestamp format bug |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 47A1D15A.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: timestamp format bug ("Roberts, Jon" <Jon.Roberts@asurion.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: timestamp format bug
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>>> 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? What would you expect from this query?: select sub.t1, substring(sub.t1 from 2 for 3) as substring_t1 from ( select 'abcde'::text as t1 ) sub > Secondly, this link shows that ms should be 000-999 and us should be > 000000-999999. Yes. That seems to me to work fine, as your examples show. -Kevin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: