Re: to_date_valid()
От | Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum |
---|---|
Тема | Re: to_date_valid() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e9617e30-1b47-54ec-b978-2c84c6420b12@wars-nicht.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: to_date_valid() ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: to_date_valid()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 27.07.2016 05:00, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 07/26/2016 06:25 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 7/5/16 4:24 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote: >>> But notwithstanding your feeling that you would like your application >>> to break if it makes use of this behaviour, it is a change that might >>> make some people pretty unhappy - nobody can tell how many. >> >> What is the use of the existing behavior? You get back an arbitrary >> implementation dependent value. We don't even guarantee what the value >> will be. If we changed it to return a different implementation >> dependent value, would users get upset? > > No they would not get upset because they wouldn't know. > > Can we just do the right thing? Attached is a patch to "do the right thing". The verification is in "to_date()" now, the extra function is removed. Regression tests are updated - two or three of them returned a wrong date before, and still passed. They fail now. Documentation is also updated. Regards, -- Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum German PostgreSQL User Group European PostgreSQL User Group - Board of Directors Volunteer Regional Contact, Germany - PostgreSQL Project
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: