Re: Keeping CURRENT_DATE and similar constructs in original format
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Keeping CURRENT_DATE and similar constructs in original format |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5878.1463098164@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Keeping CURRENT_DATE and similar constructs in original format ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Keeping CURRENT_DATE and similar constructs in original format
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes: > On Thursday, May 12, 2016, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us');>> wrote: >> (I'm not particularly in love with the node type name >> ValueFunction; anybody got a better idea?) > SQL99DateTimeFunction (or roughly whenever they were introduced)? Some of them aren't datetime-related, though. I thought about NiladicFunction but it seemed maybe too technical. > I agree with the premise. I took notice of it recently in explain output > on these lists using current_date. That example read like > ('now'::cstring)::date which was really odd since I was at least expecting > text as the intermediate cast... Yeah, that's another fun thing: the reverse listing currently differs depending on whether you're looking at an expression tree that's been through const-folding. It didn't use to --- looks like the mention of cstring started in 9.2. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: