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

Re: BUG #1094: date_part('week') bug

From: Robert Creager <Robert_Creager(at)LogicalChaos(dot)org>
To: "PostgreSQL Bugs List" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #1094: date_part('week') bug
Date: 2004-03-05 03:46:19
Message-ID: 20040304204619.4f8c446a.Robert_Creager@LogicalChaos.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
--Multipart_Thu__4_Mar_2004_20_46_19_-0700_=.xwOk6Er1v(HhYE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

When grilled further on (Thu,  4 Mar 2004 13:56:42 -0400 (AST)),
"PostgreSQL Bugs List" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> confessed:

> Some late dates give in some years wrong 
> date_part('week')
> 
> examples:
> 
> select date_part('week', '2003-12-30'::date);
>  date_part
> -----------
>          1
> (1 row)

If you read the documentation on the function date_part 'week', you'll
understand that this is the correct behavior, not a bug.

Later,
Rob

-- 
 20:42:47 up 19 days,  4:20,  2 users,  load average: 2.07, 2.14, 2.11
Linux 2.4.21-0.13_test #60 SMP Sun Dec 7 17:00:02 MST 2003

--Multipart_Thu__4_Mar_2004_20_46_19_-0700_=.xwOk6Er1v(HhYE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkBH+BIACgkQLQ/DKuwDYzlWlgCdHZtPyGme1UDaNQa2cPa4IkoA
E04Aniq5VGab/H3PJx6dFtF8srM6CGhl
=tuD7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Multipart_Thu__4_Mar_2004_20_46_19_-0700_=.xwOk6Er1v(HhYE--



Attachment: unknown_filename
Description: multipart/signed (1.1 KB)

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-03-05 19:47:33
Subject: New Instance of Variable Not Found in Subplan Bug
Previous:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2004-03-04 18:12:31
Subject: Re: BUG #1094: date_part('week') bug

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