| From: | Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |
| Date: | 2005-03-23 22:39:51 |
| Message-ID: | 16961.61495.432114.693501@giles.gnomon.org.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Roy> I have no objection to allowing things like
Roy> '1 hour 10 minutes' DAY TO SECOND
Roy> but I'm just wondering whether the hybrid syntax is an
Roy> unnecessary complication.
And furthermore, if you really want to allow constrained postgres
syntax interval literals (and I can't at the moment see how
constraining a literal is useful) then why *not* use the syntax Brian
suggested:
INTERVAL DAY TO SECOND '1 hour 10 minutes'
This keeps the non-standard postgres syntax and the SQL standard
syntax nicely separate...
-roy
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-23 22:46:42 | Re: Precision and scale of numeric column reported as value |
| Previous Message | Roy Badami | 2005-03-23 22:37:06 | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |