Am Donnerstag, 8. November 2007 schrieb Gregory Stark:
> Shouldn't the cast be implicit anyways? What does having double precision
> operators buy us? Wouldn't it introduce ambiguities?
Unless you use --enable-integer-datetimes, interval is stored as float
internally, so historically, the selecti
"Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> There are interval * double precision operators (both ways) but none for
>> interval * numeric. Adding this would make sense since interval is now
>> optionally stored as fixed-point internally. Any objections to adding this
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
There are interval * double precision operators (both ways) but none for
interval * numeric. Adding this would make sense since interval is now
optionally stored as fixed-point internally. Any objections to adding this
in 8.4?
+1
I've been casting to Numeric anywa
There are interval * double precision operators (both ways) but none for
interval * numeric. Adding this would make sense since interval is now
optionally stored as fixed-point internally. Any objections to adding this
in 8.4?
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---
