Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Piyush Newe <piyush(dot)newe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rectifying wrong Date outputs
Date: 2011-03-17 13:46:32
Message-ID: 1300369375-sup-8151@alvh.no-ip.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-03-17 14:02:07
Subject: Re: really lazy vacuums?
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-03-17 13:40:44
Subject: Re: Sync Rep and shutdown Re: Sync Rep v19

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group