Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun abr 09 15:38:21 -0300 2012:
>> What exactly would you do with it there that you couldn't do more easily
>> and clearly with plain timestamp comparisons? I'm willing to be
>> convinced, but I want to see a case where it really is the best way.
> You mean, having the constraint declaration rotate the timestamptz
> column to timestamp and then extract the epoch from that? If you go
> that route, then the queries that wish to take advantage of constraint
> exclusion would have to do likewise, which becomes ugly rather quickly.
No, I'm wondering why the partition constraints wouldn't just be
tstzcol >= '2012-04-01 00:00' and tstzcol < '2012-05-01 00:00'
or similar. What sort of constraint have you got in mind that is more
naturally expressed involving extract(epoch)? (And will the planner
think so too?)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
