Hi Tom,
Am 31.12.2004 um 20:18 schrieb Tom Lane:
Matthias Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
a) is the name uptime() OK?
Probably should use pg_uptime(), or something else starting with pg_.
What about 'pg_starttime()' since it is not a period but a point-in-time?
b) is the return-type 'Interval' OK?
It might be better to return the actual postmaster start time (as timestamptz) and let the user do whatever arithmetic he wants. With an interval, there's immediately a question of interpretation --- what current timestamp did you use in the computation? I'm not dead set on this, but it feels cleaner.
you're right. Let's go for timestamptz and let the users decide ...
Well, the unix guys have the abit to have the uptime as an interval, I'm
inclined to have boths: pg_uptime ( interval ) and pg_starttime ( timestamptz )
Regards Gaetano Mendola
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
