From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice |
Date: | 2000-11-28 14:49:37 |
Message-ID: | 14618.975422977@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-novice |
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> select ('today', interval '1 day') OVERLAPS ('yesterday', interval '18
> hours');
> (the second one fails). Now that I look, this breakage was introduced in
> March when "we" expunged operators allowed as identifiers (Tom Lane and
> I have blood on our hands on this one ;) See gram.y around line 5409.
I see it does fail, but I'm at a complete loss to understand why,
especially given that the first case still works. The grammar looks
perfectly fine AFAICT. Can you explain what's wrong here?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-28 15:09:57 | Re: is it a bug? |
Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-11-28 14:48:21 | Re: [HACKERS] is it a bug? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-28 16:14:59 | Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice |
Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-11-28 08:06:49 | Re: Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice |