Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F8FB1337B61 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:00:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15254-10 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:00:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8B2133798E for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:00:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q3lpc-0003d6-2p for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:00:20 +0200 Received: from ip-118-90-130-129.xdsl.xnet.co.nz ([118.90.130.129]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:00:20 +0200 Received: from jasen by ip-118-90-130-129.xdsl.xnet.co.nz with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:00:20 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org From: Jasen Betts Subject: Re: converting big int to date Date: 27 Mar 2011 08:32:52 GMT Organization: Dis (not Dat) Organisation Lines: 13 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-118-90-130-129.xdsl.xnet.co.nz X-Face: ?)Aw4rXwN5u0~$nqKj`xPz>xHCwgi^q+^?Ri*+R(&uv2=E1Q0Zk(>h!~o2ID@6{uf8s; a +M[5[U[QT7xFN%^gR"=tuJw%TXXR'Fp~W; (T"1(739R%m0Yyyv*gkGoPA.$b,D.w:z+<'"=-lVT?6 {T?=R^:W5g|E2#EhjKCa+nt":4b}dU7GYB*HBxn&Td$@f%.kl^:7X8rQWd[NTc"P"u6nkisze/Q; 8 "9Z{peQF,w)7UjV$c|RO/mQW/NMgWfr5*$-Z%u46"/00mx-,\R'fLPe.)^ User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-18 (Linux) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201103/43 X-Sequence-Number: 35245 On 2011-03-26, Jasen Betts wrote: > that's got the right number of zeros to > be a date expressed as microseconds since epoch except the code which produces a likely data treats it as nanoseconds.... -- ⚂⚃ 100% natural