Re: Interval literal not ANSI compliant
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Interval literal not ANSI compliant |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 11241.1094080322@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Interval literal not ANSI compliant (Ed Smith <edsmithed@yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Ed Smith <edsmithed@yahoo.com> writes: > The Postgres INTERVAL literal is not compliant with > the ANSI 2003 SQL Spec. Yup. > Are there plans to fix this? Step right up and have at it. Tom Lockhart was working on migrating the datetime support to be more like the (IMHO quite bizarre) spec syntax, but he lost interest and dropped out of the project awhile back. I don't think any of the rest of the current developers care much about this point. But we'd accept a patch, as long as it was reasonably cleanly coded (ie, supportable into the future). The interval datatype needs love in other ways --- for instance, in my opinion it really ought to store months/days/seconds internally not just months/seconds, so as to avoid surprising behavior at DST transitions. (The existing representation effectively assumes that a day is always the same number of seconds, which is wrong on DST transition days.) But this area is not high on the list of interests of any active PG developers. We need somebody to take ownership of the problem. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: