Re: Revisiting extract(epoch from timestamp) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Re: Revisiting extract(epoch from timestamp)
Date
Msg-id daed4dd86f28fcfb42153e314477160f@biglumber.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Revisiting extract(epoch from timestamp)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Revisiting extract(epoch from timestamp)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


> so that we could mark it immutable.  On the other hand, it's not
> entirely apparent why people would need to create indexes on the epoch
> value rather than just indexing the timestamp itself

Well, it makes for smaller indexes if you don't really care about 
sub-second resolutions.

- -- 
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201204091345
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAk+DIJcACgkQvJuQZxSWSsiLsQCgrA8Sxcljm+HPJ1jQY7l0u3UZ
UTwAnjBGM7SstLCnihtRkxDJrMax2Ikl
=Kjic
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Revisiting extract(epoch from timestamp)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: bug in fast-path locking