Laurenz Albe writes:
> On Tue, 2022-07-05 at 19:37 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Of course the internal representation of timestamp with time zone data
>> type is not affected by the time zone setting. But why other form of
>> to_timestamp is labeled as stable? If your theory is correct, then
>> o
On Tue, 2022-07-05 at 19:37 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > Are you sure? I'd say that "to_timestamp(double precision)" always
> > produces the same timestamp for the same argument. What changes with
> > the setting of "timezone" is how that timestamp is converted to a
> > string, but that's a dif
> Are you sure? I'd say that "to_timestamp(double precision)" always
> produces the same timestamp for the same argument. What changes with
> the setting of "timezone" is how that timestamp is converted to a
> string, but that's a different affair.
Of course the internal representation of timest
On Tue, 2022-07-05 at 17:29 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> I found that provolatile attribute of to_timestamp in pg_proc is
> wrong:
>
> test=# select provolatile, proargtypes from pg_proc where proname =
> 'to_timestamp' and proargtypes[0] = 701;
> provolatile | proargtypes
> -+-
I found that provolatile attribute of to_timestamp in pg_proc is
wrong:
test=# select provolatile, proargtypes from pg_proc where proname =
'to_timestamp' and proargtypes[0] = 701;
provolatile | proargtypes
-+-
i | 701
(1 row)
'i' (immutable) is clearly wrong
