Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTim9Ys8x8wy8gcYihdPdZHxrKtp19vr_mNUN+x=j@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs
Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Piyush Newe's message of jue mar 17 02:30:06 -0300 2011: >> Sorry for creating the confusion. The table drawn was PostgreSQL vs EDB >> Advanced Server. >> Thanks Burce for clarification. >> >> For the 1-digit, 2-digit & 3-digit Year inputs, as I said, I didn't see any >> document in PG which will explain what would be the century considered if it >> is not given. If I missed out it somewhere please let me know. > > Keep in mind that the datetime stuff was abandoned by the maintainer > some years ago with quite some rough edges. Some of it has been fixed, > but a lot of bugs remain. Looks like this is one of those places and it > seems appropriate to spend some time fixing it. Since it would involve > a behavior change, it should only go to 9.2, of course. I wouldn't object to fixing the problem with # of digits > # of Ys in 9.1, if the fix is simple and clear-cut. I think we are still accepting patches to make minor tweaks, like the tab-completion patch I committed yesterday. It also doesn't bother me tremendously if we push it off, but I don't think that anyone's going to be too sad if TO_DATE('01-jan-2010', 'DD-MON-YYY') starts returning something more sensible than 3010-01-01. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: