Re: BUG #1518: Conversions to (undocumented) SQL year-month and

Roy Badami wrote:
> Bruce> Seems that is implentation-dependent so I added "round' or
> Bruce> error" to the TODO item.
>
> Ah, OK. "A guide to the SQL standard" claims it's an exception, but I
> haven't checked the actual standard.

Here is an email stating it is implementation defined:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-03/msg00162.php

> Bruce> Uh, I think this already works fine for PG syntax, and I
> Bruce> assume once we support ANSI syntax it will work fine too:
>
> I guess. It's just that it's something that EXTRACT doesn't currently
> have to worry about, so it would be easy to overlook.

I don't see how the new code would break EXTACT. I don't think we are
going to have to change any internal representations.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073