timestamp_part() bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tatsuo Ishii
Subject timestamp_part() bug?
Date
Msg-id 20020227170750O.t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: timestamp_part() bug?  (Karel Zak <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>)
Re: timestamp_part() bug?  (Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
I see following in the manual:

-------------------------------------------------------------------
The seconds field, including fractional parts, multiplied by
1000. Note that this includes full seconds.     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~     SELECT EXTRACT(MILLISECONDS
FROMTIME '17:12:28.5');     Result: 28500
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------

And I see:

test=# select current_timestamp,extract(milliseconds from current_timestamp);         timestamptz          | date_part

-------------------------------+-----------2002-02-27 14:45:53.945529+09 |   945.529
(1 row)

Apparently there's an inconsistency among manuals, timestamp(tz)_part
and timetz_part. Does anybody know which one is correct?
--
Tatsuo Ishii


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jean-Michel POURE
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.0 ??
Next
From: Mike Mascari
Date:
Subject: LRU and full table scans