db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nirmal Fernando <nirmal070...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Supporting nanoseconds resolution in an insertion
Date Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:37:36 GMT
Thanks Knut for the reply!!

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Knut Anders Hatlen
<knut.hatlen@oracle.com>wrote:

> Nirmal Fernando <nirmal070125@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > While referring to DateTimeTest I found the following test case [1].
> > I think we should allow up to nanoseconds, but I am wondering whether
> > it's not the ISO format.
> >
> > Is it ok to change this test case?
>
> Hi Nirmal,
>
> I think this is an OK change. In SQL:2003, vol 2, section 5.3 <literal>,
> under Conformance Rules, I found this note:
>
> ,----
> | 2) Without Feature F555, “Enhanced seconds precision”, in conforming
> | SQL language, an <unsigned integer> that is a <seconds fraction> that
> | is contained in a <timestamp literal> shall not contain more than 6
> | <digit>s.
> `----
>
> So it appears there is a standard feature called "Enhanced seconds
> precision" that allows us to have more than six digits in the fraction
> part of a timestamp literal. We haven't implemented it yet (see for
> example http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/SQLvsDerbyFeatures), but I don't
> see any reason why we shouldn't.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Knut Anders
>



-- 
Best Regards,
Nirmal

C.S.Nirmal J. Fernando
Department of Computer Science & Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
University of Moratuwa,
Sri Lanka.

Mime
View raw message