Re: Reg: SQL Query for Postgres 8.4.3
От | Kevin Grittner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reg: SQL Query for Postgres 8.4.3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4BDFE90B020000250003123A@gw.wicourts.gov обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reg: SQL Query for Postgres 8.4.3 (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Reg: SQL Query for Postgres 8.4.3
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the OP is probably running a version that doesn't include > the Jan 7 commit, which was effectively undone by the Jan 25 > commit for CVS HEAD. It sure looks like it. > It looks like this was intentional based on spec behavior > of overlay(), but should we consider maintaining the historical > behavior instead? I know I read through the spec (several versions of it) related to this issue when I reviewed the patch, and if memory serves the 9.0 behavior is what the spec requires. Obviously that's a behavior change, so it can't be back-patched. I'm inclined to think the previous behavior was pretty marginal, and there is certainly a workaround -- omit the third parameter rather than specifying a negative number: SELECT substring(B'1111000000000001' from 5); substring --------------000000000001 (1 row) SELECT substring(B'1111000000000001' from 4); substring ---------------1000000000001 (1 row) We have maintained nonstandard behavior in the past for compatibility reasons, so it's a fair question; however, I'm inclined toward the standard on this one. -Kevin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: