From: Stuart Brooks <stuartb@cat.co.za>
To: Michael Glaesemann <grzm@seespotcode.net>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: TIMESTAMP comparison problem
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:52:13 +0200
Message-ID: <4795E6FD.4080107@cat.co.za> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <794E6600-42A8-41A2-822D-080E19F9F0CC@seespotcode.net>
References: <4795A3B0.3010505@cat.co.za>
<794E6600-42A8-41A2-822D-080E19F9F0CC@seespotcode.net>
>> If I reduce the precision to 3 for the timestamps it appears to work
>> although it makes me nervous.
>
> With float timestamps, you're fooling yourself if you think those
> numbers past the decimal are reliable.
>
>> Should I just recompile to use integer datetimes? I would like to
>> have at least microsecond precision.
>
> Well, you can't get better than microsecond precision with timestamps
> in Postgres. And the only way you can rely on that level of precision
> is to compile with --enable-integer-datetimes.
>
> Michael Glaesemann
I thought that might be the case, thanks for the help,
Stuart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: stuartb@cat.co.za, grzm@seespotcode.net
Subject: Re: TIMESTAMP comparison problem
In-Reply-To: <4795E6FD.4080107@cat.co.za>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox