Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Tom> In particular we have to consider the behavior of the input
> Tom> and output routines for cases like COPY.
> Hmm, but COPY is non-standard, so I'd be happy that it insisted on
> postgres interval syntax.
It's not different from
INSERT INTO foo VALUES('1 year 1 month');
Nothing nonstandard about that that I can see.
> ANSI interval syntax is confusing in this
> context, precisely because there is nowhere to actually put an
> 'interval qualifier' in the literals.
Yes. The ISO design for the datatype is pretty brain-dead if you ask
me --- the basic meaning of a data literal shouldn't be so dependent
on context. Still, it's there, and we should make some effort towards
supporting all but the really awfulest parts of it ;-)
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Roy Badami||Date: 2005-03-23 23:42:36|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2005-03-23 23:28:28|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,|