> > Value Units
> > +8 hours
> > -8 hours
> > 8.0 seconds
> > 8 ?? seconds ??
> > I would propose that the last example should be interpreted in units of
> > seconds, but that could be perilously close to the conventions required
> > for the signed examples. Comments?
> Yipes. I do not like the idea that '+8' and '8' yield radically
> different results. That's definitely going to create unhappiness.
Yeah, I agree. The ugliness is that an unsigned integer has been
accepted in the past as "seconds", and would seem to be a reasonable
> I suggest that the current code is more correct than you think ;-).
> ISTM it is a good idea to require a units field, or at least some
> punctuation giving a clue about units --- for example I do not object to
> '08:00' being interpreted as hours and minutes. But I would be inclined
> to reject all four of the forms '+8', '-8', '8.0', and '8' as ambiguous.
> Is there something in the SQL spec that requires us to accept them?
Single-field signed integers (and unsigned integers?) must be acceptable
for a time zone specification (pretty sure this is covered in the SQL
spec). Remember that SQL is woefully inadequate for date, time, and time
zone support, but afaicr a signed integer is one of the few things they
do specify ;)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Mikheev, Vadim||Date: 2001-05-19 00:08:07|
|Subject: RE: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem|
|Previous:||From: mlw||Date: 2001-05-18 23:23:28|
|Subject: External search engine, advice|
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2001-05-19 00:55:12|
|Subject: Re: Re: Problems with avg on interval data type |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2001-05-18 22:18:31|
|Subject: Re: select avg() and sum() returns false value |