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

Re: Bug #463: Make 'infinity' work with type 'date'

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: dax(at)gurulabs(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bug #463: Make 'infinity' work with type 'date'
Date: 2001-10-12 05:35:42
Message-ID: 3BC6812E.7C774540@fourpalms.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
> Can someone comment on this?  The problem appears in current sources:

And for every Postgres release since 1989...

>         test=> INSERT INTO a VALUES ('infinity');
>         ERROR:  Unrecognized date external representation 'infinity'
> Is there a reason we support "infinity" in timestamp and not date?

Sure. Timestamp features were based on abstime features (at least partly
to support conversions to the newer type), and date features are from
date. "Infinity" for timestamp (or date) is not as compelling as it is
for abstime, which has a very limited range. I've been a fan of those
nifty features, but am not sure they are really necessary now that
PostgreSQL supports NULLs for pass by value types and supports a wider
range in the timestamp type (date has always had a wide range).

                    - Thomas

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: pgsql-bugsDate: 2001-10-12 09:26:58
Subject: Bug #480: problem with LIKE pattern matches involving % and \_
Previous:From: pgsql-bugsDate: 2001-10-12 01:52:10
Subject: Bug #479: Backend crashes when using certain commands with SJIS encoded databases

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