X-Original-To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (developer.postgresql.org [64.117.224.193]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77798925515 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 15:17:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193]) by localhost (developer.postgresql.org [64.117.224.193:10024]) (amavisd-new) with ESMTP id 72873-02 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 15:17:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spirit.aldeiadigital.com.br (iplus-fac-213-137.xdsl-fixo.ctbcnetsuper.com.br [200.225.213.137]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF36992534A for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 15:17:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from webmail.ad2.com.br (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by spirit.aldeiadigital.com.br (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h4QJHjN30434 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 16:17:47 -0300 Received: from 192.168.1.101 (SquirrelMail authenticated user alepaes) by webmail.ad2.com.br with HTTP; Mon, 26 May 2003 16:17:47 -0300 (BRT) Message-ID: <1255.192.168.1.101.1053976667.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> In-Reply-To: <3967.1053972532@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <1288.200.170.145.209.1053953043.squirrel@webmail.ad2.com.br> <3967.1053972532@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 16:17:47 -0300 (BRT) Subject: Re: timestamp field - select error From: "alexandre :: aldeia digital" To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Archive-Number: 200305/500 X-Sequence-Number: 13665 Tom, Really the field is a Domain (datetime = timestamp without timezone). And for information, this is a log table. If the criteria is more "distant" of the most recent registers (50 or 60), the error occurs. Thank´s Tom.....I will report my tests. alexandre > "alexandre :: aldeia digital" writes: >> * But if I do: (...) where cf03dthr <= '2003-05-26' (...) >> * I get: "ERROR: convert_timevalue_to_scalar: unsupported type 16976" > > I could not reproduce this here. If your column is actually of a domain > over timestamp, then you may need some post-7.3.2 bug fixes; see the > just-released 7.3.3. Otherwise, please provide a self-contained test > case. > > regards, tom lane >