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

Re: [HACKERS] datetime regression test fails at daylight savings transitions

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] datetime regression test fails at daylight savings transitions
Date: 1998-10-26 17:42:35
Message-ID: 3634B48B.6A955CB@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Hmm.  This offers a potential solution, then.  I propose that "day"
> ought to be considered a qualitative time interval, and that
>         'now'::datetime + '1 day'::timespan
> need not yield the same thing as
>         'now'::datetime + '24 hours'::timespan
> Changing things in that way might be infeasible because of backwards
> compatibility constraints, but I think this is what the natural
> interpretation would be.  (Clearly it's what the writer of the 
> datetime regression test was expecting...)

Well, no I wasn't expecting that really :)

I just wanted to be sure to test 'yesterday' and 'tomorrow' behavior,
and didn't want to omit those tests just because they might fail for ~1%
of the year.

Making 'day' a qualitative time is probably possible, just chewing up
another 4 bytes of storage (for 16 bytes rather than 12). But we'll have
to think it through to make sure there aren't other side effects or
other no-so-expected behavior under other conditions.

                    - Tom

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jan WieckDate: 1998-10-26 17:50:18
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] How do we find serial types
Previous:From: Jan WieckDate: 1998-10-26 17:35:58
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] How do we find serial types

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