At 03:04 AM 19/04/2006, you wrote:

>On Apr 17, 2006, at 17:24, Helen Borrie wrote:
>
> > It's not a "problem". The time part of a timestamp is implemented as
> > a numeric(9,4) so, if you attempt to store a (9,5), you get an
> > overflow. Fb 2 still has a maximum subsecond precision of 10^ -4
> > but it has applied syntax so that you can set how precise you want it
> > to be (within that range).
>
>That makes sense for insertions and updates, but it can be a little
>annoying for comparisons. It would be nice to be able to do date
>range compares without having to format for the specific engine, but
>I suppose I should just stop whining ;-)

In many cases, you don't don't really need a "perfect equality"
comparison for timestamps. BETWEEN is your best pal here.

./heLen