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.