Re: postgresql 7.3.2 bug on date '1901-12-13' and '1901-12
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: postgresql 7.3.2 bug on date '1901-12-13' and '1901-12 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26111.1061499732@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: postgresql 7.3.2 bug on date '1901-12-13' and '1901-12 (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: postgresql 7.3.2 bug on date '1901-12-13' and '1901-12
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com> writes: >>> This still doesn't explain why Arnold sees a failure with to_date and >>> we don't, though. > Wait, he's in australia, what if he's getting the edge case the other way. > It starts out on the 14th, does the timezone conversion. But then it > looks like it's on the 13th which doesn't have timezone info and doesn't > do the timezone conversion back. Bingo. regression=# show time zone; TimeZone ---------- EST5EDT (1 row) regression=# select to_date('1901/12/14', 'YYYY/MM/DD'); to_date ------------ 1901-12-14 (1 row) regression=# set time zone 'CST-9:30CDT'; SET regression=# select to_date('1901/12/14', 'YYYY/MM/DD'); to_date ------------ 1901-12-13 (1 row) It looks like the same result occurs in any time zone east of Greenwich. Looking at the code, the problem seems to be that to_date is built as timestamptz_date(to_timestamp(str,fmt)) The initial step yields regression=# select to_timestamp('1901/12/14', 'YYYY/MM/DD'); to_timestamp --------------------- 1901-12-13 23:00:00 (1 row) and then timestamptz_date quite reasonably yields 1901-12-13. I'm inclined to fix to_date by decomposing the code differently --- it should avoid the coercion to timestamp, which is a waste of cycles anyway. But is to_timestamp (and more generally timestamp's input converter) broken? If so, how can we do better? I don't think we can entirely avoid the problem of a transition between local and GMT time. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: