From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Martin A(dot) Brooks" <martin(at)antibodymx(dot)net> |
Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #6028: age() function output contracts "months", but not any other units. |
Date: | 2011-05-23 18:50:59 |
Message-ID: | 18111.1306176659@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"Martin A. Brooks" <martin(at)antibodymx(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 19:02, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ISTM that changing interval's output formatting would create far too
>> many problems to be justifiable for such a purely cosmetic issue.
> I almost entirely agree with you except....
> My current $dayjob is working in an industry where details and aesthetics
> are everything. We will spend thousands of hours of processor time just
> to make sure than the sheen on an animal's fur will suggest "healthy and
> luxuriant" rather than "warm and moist". It's about artistic polish.
> If people are agreeing that this is not the intended, desrired or
> specified output for this function, then make with the polish. It isn't
> the first, and won't be the last, time that something has potentially
> broken compatibility in postgres.
I think possibly you misunderstand the scope of the breakage you're
proposing. This is not about the age() function. It's interval_out()
that's at stake, and so changing this would change the output formatting
for *every* operation that yields intervals. That makes it pretty
high-risk.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-05-23 18:57:27 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #6034: pg_upgrade fails when it should not. |
Previous Message | Martin A. Brooks | 2011-05-23 18:44:11 | Re: BUG #6028: age() function output contracts "months", but not any other units. |