At 16:33 +0300 on 18/08/1999, Jim Mercer wrote:
> i suspect this would be more efficient than date_part('epoch', timefield).
Yes, but if someday someone decides that dates should be represented in
another way, this will break, and date_part( 'epoch', timefield ) will
always return the seconds since epoch. Data encapsulation thingie.
> also, is there a reverse to this?
>
> ie. how does one inject unix time_t data into an abstime field.
Into a datetime, simply use datetime( n ). To an abstime, add an abstime()
around the former. Don't try abstime( n ) - at least it doesn't work in 6.4.
> then i bring it in using: "COPY tb USING STDIN;"
>
> it would be nice if i could do a batch of:
> "INSERT INTO tb (time_t, data1, date2) VALUES (934931604, 'aa', 'bb');"
copy is more efficient that a bunch of inserts, mind you.
Herouth
--
Herouth Maoz, Internet developer.
Open University of Israel - Telem project
http://telem.openu.ac.il/~herutma
