| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Vik Reykja <vikreykja(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Inputting relative datetimes | 
| Date: | 2011-08-27 23:39:48 | 
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa0BRHMUY=mb8etWhi3G9ZAHk1v-0jhAmk70f0_FWfxag@mail.gmail.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 27 August 2011 12:29, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> ... if nothing else it has been a
>> fun exercise figuring out how the datetime string parsing code works.
>
> While looking through the current code, I spotted the following oddity:
>
> select timestamp 'yesterday 10:30';
>      timestamp
> ---------------------
>  2011-08-26 10:30:00
>
> which is what you'd expect, however:
>
> select timestamp '10:30 yesterday';
>      timestamp
> ---------------------
>  2011-08-26 00:00:00
>
> Similarly "today" and "tomorrow" reset any time fields so far, but
> ISTM that they should really be preserving the hour, min, sec fields
> decoded so far.
Sounds right to me. Want to send a patch?
BTW, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes me a bit skeptical
about further extending this...
-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-08-28 00:09:08 | spinlocks on HP-UX | 
| Previous Message | Daniel Farina | 2011-08-27 23:02:57 | Re: Cryptic error message in low-memory conditions |