On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 09:38, David Jarvis <thangalin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > >> We had a little chat about this with Magnus. It's pretty surprising that >> there's no built-in function to do this, we should consider adding one. > > I agree; you should be able to create a timestamp or a date from integer > values. Others, apparently, have written code. The implementation I did was > pretty rudimentary, but I was going for speed. > > If you could overload to_date and to_timestamp, that would be great. For > example: > > to_date( year ) = year-01-01 > to_date( year, month ) = year-month-01 > to_date( year, month, day ) = year-month-day > > to_timestamp( year, month, day, hour ) = year-month-day hour:00:00.0000 GMT > etc. Not that it would make a huge difference over having to specify 1's and 0's there, but I agree that could be useful. >> construct_timestamp(year int4, month int4, date int4, hour int4, minute >> int4, second int4, milliseconds int4, timezone text) > > Also, "date int4" should be "day int4", to avoid confusion with the date > type. Yes, absolutely. > Does it makes sense to use named parameter notation for the first value (the > year)? This could be potentially confusing: How so? If it does named parameters, why not all? > to_date() - What would this return? now()? Jan 1st, 1970? 2000? ERROR, IMHO. We have a function for now() already, and the others are so arbitrary there is no way to explain such a choice. > Similarly, to_timestamp() ...? Seems meaningless without at least a full > date and an hour. Agreed. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
