I think we broke date_part for extracting seconds from time arguments. It
appears we leave out the milliseconds whereas we don't for timestamp
arguments. This was not the case in 8.3 where we included the milliseconds for
both data types.
Unless this is intentional? I know we wacked around both
Gregory Stark st...@mit.edu writes:
I think we broke date_part for extracting seconds from time arguments. It
appears we leave out the milliseconds whereas we don't for timestamp
arguments. This was not the case in 8.3 where we included the milliseconds for
both data types.
It's not new.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree that we should change it, but should we back-patch it, and if so
how far?
Well at least to 8.4 so someone who has just always been using
downloaded binaries or binaries compiled with the default
configuration continues
Greg Stark st...@mit.edu writes:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree that we should change it, but should we back-patch it, and if so
how far?
Well at least to 8.4 so someone who has just always been using
downloaded binaries or binaries compiled with
