On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 14:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> writes:
> > On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 03:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I intend to look at that tomorrow. Meanwhile, have you got a fix
> >> for bug#1500?
> >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-02/msg00226.php
> > Sorry. Not yet. I haven't time today. Maybe next week :-(
> I looked at this and found the problem is that dch_date() isn't
> defending itself against the possibility that tm->tm_mon is zero,
> as it well might be for an interval. What do you think about
> just adding
> case DCH_MONTH:
> + if (!tm->tm_mon)
> + return 0;
> and similarly in each of the other case arms that use tm_mon?
Yes, I think you're right. It's because original code was for non-
interval 'tm' struct where is no problem with zeros.
> This would case "MON" to convert to a null string for intervals,
> which is probably as good as we can do.
Yes. The final solution will be remove all to_char(interval) stuff in
Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gavin Sherry||Date: 2005-03-26 00:02:39|
|Subject: Re: Missing segment 3 of index|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-03-25 23:46:58|
|Subject: Re: HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate missing a bet? |