Re: date_part()/EXTRACT(second) behaviour with time data type

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Postgres <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: date_part()/EXTRACT(second) behaviour with time data type
Date: 2009-07-29 17:07:16
Message-ID: 407d949e0907291007p6817d4e1u91b964fe7a16ec2a@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I agree that we should change it, but should we back-patch it, and if so
> how far?
>

Well at least to 8.4 so someone who has just always been using
downloaded binaries or binaries compiled with the default
configuration continues to get the same behaviour.

My inclination would be to backpatch it further back. But I'm not 100%
sure either.

--
greg
http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message decibel 2009-07-29 17:11:42 Re: Higher TOAST compression.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-07-29 16:37:20 Re: system timezone regression failure