Re: BUG #6028: age() function output contracts "months", but not any other units.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #6028: age() function output contracts "months", but not any other units. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18111.1306176659@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #6028: age() function output contracts "months", but not any other units. ("Martin A. Brooks" <martin@antibodyMX.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #6028: age() function output contracts "months", but
not any other units.
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
"Martin A. Brooks" <martin@antibodymx.net> writes: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 19:02, Tom Lane wrote: >> ISTM that changing interval's output formatting would create far too >> many problems to be justifiable for such a purely cosmetic issue. > I almost entirely agree with you except.... > My current $dayjob is working in an industry where details and aesthetics > are everything. We will spend thousands of hours of processor time just > to make sure than the sheen on an animal's fur will suggest "healthy and > luxuriant" rather than "warm and moist". It's about artistic polish. > If people are agreeing that this is not the intended, desrired or > specified output for this function, then make with the polish. It isn't > the first, and won't be the last, time that something has potentially > broken compatibility in postgres. I think possibly you misunderstand the scope of the breakage you're proposing. This is not about the age() function. It's interval_out() that's at stake, and so changing this would change the output formatting for *every* operation that yields intervals. That makes it pretty high-risk. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: