On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 10:00:50AM +0100, Luis Sousa wrote: > I worked around this problem returning the difference between the two > dates, using extract doy from both. > Anyway, this will cause a bug on my code when changing the year. Any ideas?
Why don't you use the minus operator? SELECT '2004-05-14 16:00'::timestamp - '2004-02-18 16:00'::timestamp; ?column? ---------- 86 days Or, if you need the age just in days: SELECT extract(day from '2004-05-14 16:00'::timestamp - '2004-02-18 16:00'::timestamp); date_part ----------- 86 or SELECT '2004-05-14 16:00'::date - '2004-02-18 16:00'::date; ?column? ---------- 86 Note that '2004-05-14 16:00'::date is actually '2004-05-14 00:00'::date, so the last two are not always equal. > Tom Lane wrote: > > >Theodore Petrosky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >>wow.... at first I thought I had my head around a leap > >>year problem so I advanced your query a year.... > >> > >> > > > >I think what's going on here is a difference of interpretation about > >whether an "M months D days" interval means to add the months first > >or the days first. For instance > > > >2005-02-18 plus 2 months = 2005-04-18, plus 24 days = 2005-05-12 > > > >2005-02-18 plus 24 days = 2005-03-14, plus 2 months = 2005-05-14 > > > >The timestamp-plus-interval operator is evidently doing addition the > >first way, but it looks like age() is calculating the difference in a > >way that implicitly corresponds to the second way. > > > >I have some vague recollection that this has come up before, but > >I don't recall whether we concluded that age() needs to be changed > >or not. In any case it's not risen to the top of anyone's to-do list, > >because I see that age() still acts this way in CVS tip. > > > > regards, tom lane -- Fduch M. Pravking ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])