Re: Broken(?) 'interval' problems. [Was: ISO 8601 "Time Intervals"] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruno Wolff III
Subject Re: Broken(?) 'interval' problems. [Was: ISO 8601 "Time Intervals"]
Date
Msg-id 20030910202144.GA30774@wolff.to
Whole thread Raw
In response to Broken(?) 'interval' problems. [Was: ISO 8601 "Time Intervals"]  ("Ron Mayer" <ron@intervideo.com>)
Responses Re: Broken(?) 'interval' problems. [Was: ISO 8601 "Time Intervals"]  ("Ron Mayer" <ron@intervideo.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 11:48:58 -0700, Ron Mayer <ron@intervideo.com> wrote:
> 
> Looks like I'll take a shot at more broadly hacking the postgresql 
> time interval code.  Before doing so, I wanted to ask opinions
> regarding what the "right" behavior is of various timestamp/interval
> operations.

Can you document which part of a mixed interval (with both months and
seconds parts) gets added first to a timestamp? I haven't ever run
accross anything which says which gets done first.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: FK type mismatches?