On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 11:10:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The problem is that an interval datum already implies the units,
> > so in order to allow interval * interval we would have to add a
> > new type "interval squared", which would probably be
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The problem is that an interval datum already implies the units, so in
> order to allow interval * interval we would have to add a new type
> "interval squared", which would probably be considered to be a bit
> foolish.
Not only foolish but complic
Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAICS, stddev/variance require the concept of multiplying two input
> values together (square, and also square root, are in the formulas).
> I don't know what it means to multiply two intervals --- there's no
> such operator in Postgres, anyway.
The problem is not much different
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just ran across this, and was wondering whether it's worth a
> back-patch. The interval type has an aggregate for average (AVG), but
> not one for standard deviation (STDDEV) or variance (VARIANCE).
AFAICS, stddev/variance require the concept of multip
David Fetter wrote:
> I just ran across this, and was wondering whether it's worth a
> back-patch.
New features are not back-patched.
> The interval type has an aggregate for average (AVG),
> but not one for standard deviation (STDDEV) or variance (VARIANCE).
>
> Is this a bug?
No, it's a missin
Kind people,
I just ran across this, and was wondering whether it's worth a
back-patch. The interval type has an aggregate for average (AVG), but
not one for standard deviation (STDDEV) or variance (VARIANCE).
Is this a bug? Is there some problem with defining variance over
intervals?
TIA for
