To me it seems quite weird that a CLR TimeSpan by default be stored as a sql TIME, since they are conceptually different things. And with the wildly different ranges there is as seen a practical difference too.
I can find no real discussion on this change in NH-1657 and in the mail archives, though it was mentiond on Feb 5th. What is the reasoning behind this move? Has anyone actually requested this change? /Oskar 2009/3/25 Dario Quintana <[email protected]> > Roger, hi > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Roger Kratz <[email protected]>wrote: > >> IMHO – even with timespan between 0 and 24h, current impl give strange >> results. As shown in attached jira tests, the timespan read has incorrect >> days (even when timespan between 0 and 24h). Timespan persisted != timespan >> read. Earlier nh tests only confirmed that hour, minutes and seconds >> properties of the timespan are the same. >> > BTW, what dialect are you using ? > When you're using TimeSpan, which match to an SqlServer Time type, you > can't talk about days, are completed ignored, you've to talk about hours, > minutes, seconds. > > I got passing VerifyDaysShouldBeZeroInSmallTimeSpan test. > > > -- > Dario Quintana > http://darioquintana.com.ar > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
