X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E912D7918 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:12:09 -0300 (ADT) 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 50673-08 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:12:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tigger.fuhr.org (tigger.fuhr.org [63.214.45.158]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D9CD7032 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:12:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from winnie.fuhr.org (winnie.fuhr.org [10.1.0.1]) by tigger.fuhr.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j87FBw5I036212 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:12:01 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mfuhr@winnie.fuhr.org) Received: from winnie.fuhr.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winnie.fuhr.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j87FBw0U020139; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:11:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mfuhr@winnie.fuhr.org) Received: (from mfuhr@localhost) by winnie.fuhr.org (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j87FBw9p020138; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:11:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mfuhr) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:11:58 -0600 From: Michael Fuhr To: Louise Catherine Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: AGE function Message-ID: <20050907151158.GA20118@winnie.fuhr.org> References: <20050907062634.GA14474@winnie.fuhr.org> <20050907072216.74176.qmail@web33408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20050907142454.GA19847@winnie.fuhr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050907142454.GA19847@winnie.fuhr.org> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.005 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.005] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200509/73 X-Sequence-Number: 22620 On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:24:54AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: > On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:05:06PM -0700, Louise Catherine wrote: > > 1. How does postgre 7.3.3 calculate AGE function? > > 2. Why the result produced by postgre 7.3.3 > > is different from postgre 8.0.3 ? > > The change appears to have been committed in 7.4 and later in > response to Bug #1332: Specifically, 7.4.7 and later. -- Michael Fuhr