Re: Inconsistent behavior with AGE() - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Inconsistent behavior with AGE()
Date
Msg-id 200410281534.12873.josh@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Inconsistent behavior with AGE()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
Tom,

> Actually, the definition of the single-parameter variants of age() is
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0age(current_date, $1)
> not
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0age(now(), $1)
>
> I'm not sure this is wrong, but perhaps it should be better documented.

Hmmm ... well, if that's the definition, then we probably don't need to cha=
nge=20
it.=20=20

--Josh

--=20
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Inconsistent behavior with AGE()
Next
From: Adrian Maier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Question on the 8.0Beta Version