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

Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice
Date: 2000-11-28 14:49:37
Message-ID: 14618.975422977@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-novice
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
>   select ('today', interval '1 day') OVERLAPS ('yesterday', interval '18
> hours');

> (the second one fails). Now that I look, this breakage was introduced in
> March when "we" expunged operators allowed as identifiers (Tom Lane and
> I have blood on our hands on this one ;) See gram.y around line 5409.

I see it does fail, but I'm at a complete loss to understand why,
especially given that the first case still works.  The grammar looks
perfectly fine AFAICT.  Can you explain what's wrong here?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-28 16:14:59
Subject: Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice
Previous:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-11-28 08:06:49
Subject: Re: Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-28 15:09:57
Subject: Re: is it a bug?
Previous:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-11-28 14:48:21
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] is it a bug?

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