Re: BUG #18348: Inconsistency with EXTRACT([field] from INTERVAL);
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18348: Inconsistency with EXTRACT([field] from INTERVAL); |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 473944.1715176550@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #18348: Inconsistency with EXTRACT([field] from INTERVAL); ("Wetmore, Matthew (CTR)" <Matthew.Wetmore@evernorth.com>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
"Wetmore, Matthew (CTR)" <Matthew.Wetmore@evernorth.com> writes: > Devils advocating here, feel free to ignore. > Is there a real need for a negative month? Sounds like high level this could be disastrous if I screw up the syntax. (Ah,memories of DD) What are you objecting to the "need for"? That intervals can store negative months at all? I think that ship sailed a couple decades ago. It's hard to use interval as the output of, say, timestamp minus timestamp if it refuses to allow negative values. The next fallback position perhaps could be that extract(quarter ...) could throw error for negative input, but that seems like mostly a foot-gun. We've striven elsewhere to not have it throw error, even if there's not any very sane choice to make. For instance, these are pre-existing behaviors: regression=# select extract(quarter from interval 'infinity'); extract --------- (1 row) regression=# select extract(quarter from interval '-infinity'); extract --------- (1 row) Maybe there's a case for returning null for "quarter" for any negative months value, but that seems inconsistent with other behaviors of extract(). The pattern I see for finite values is that negating the input interval negates each output of extract(). regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: