Re: index over timestamp not being used
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: index over timestamp not being used |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 15140.1185306195@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: index over timestamp not being used (Arnau <arnaulist@andromeiberica.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: index over timestamp not being used
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
Arnau <arnaulist@andromeiberica.com> writes:
>> Alternatively, do you really need to_timestamp at all? The standard
>> timestamp input routine won't have any problem with that format:
>> t.timestamp_in >= '20070101'
> This is always I think I'm worried, what happens if one day the internal
> format in which the DB stores the date/timestamps changes. I mean, if
> instead of being stored as YYYYMMDD is stored as DDMMYYYY, should we
> have to change all the queries?
You are confusing internal storage format with the external
representation.
> I thought the
> to_char/to_date/to_timestamp functions were intented for this purposes
No, they're intended for dealing with wacky formats that the regular
input/output routines can't understand or produce.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: