X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06A155FF8 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:26:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86264-04 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:26:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A430A55F4A for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:26:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j22KQQfK013467; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 15:26:26 -0500 (EST) To: Bret Hughes Cc: postgresql sql list Subject: Re: definative way to place secs from epoc into timestamp In-reply-to: <1109794066.27857.100.camel@bretsony> References: <1109780719.28180.86.camel@bretsony> <13089.1109793126@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1109794066.27857.100.camel@bretsony> Comments: In-reply-to Bret Hughes message dated "02 Mar 2005 14:07:46 -0600" Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:26:26 -0500 Message-ID: <13466.1109795186@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.007 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200503/27 X-Sequence-Number: 20506 Bret Hughes writes: > Thanks for the feed back tom I say that but I could not believe that I > have to jump through all those hoops on an insert or update > update mytable set (lasttime =(SELECT TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE 'epoch' + > 982384720 * INTERVAL '1 second') ) > is this what you are saying I need to do? You can make a function that embodies whichever semantics you want. > also, what is happening with abstime(982384720)? this works as expected > (by me ). Is this a bad idea? It won't be there forever. regards, tom lane