Re: [PATH] Correct negative/zero year in to_date/to_timestamp

From: Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATH] Correct negative/zero year in to_date/to_timestamp
Date: 2016-02-28 08:51:03
Message-ID: d644f28a-2875-4605-98aa-90a29efb185c@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>But I'm waiting for a discussion: what part should be changed?

I for compliance with the standard (all ISO). In addition Oracle uses
"IYYY" format.
Standards allow to reduce liability. But I think someone like Tom Lane can
have the final say because we break backward compatibility.
Options "year"/"isoyear" may confuse the users.

Thanks.

--
Yury Zhuravlev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2016-02-28 09:53:36 Re: Relation cache invalidation on replica
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-02-28 08:36:57 Re: proposal: get oldest LSN - function