| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New to_timestamp implementation is pretty strict |
| Date: | 2008-12-02 08:19:42 |
| Message-ID: | 4934EF9E.7040600@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> After thinking about it I'm inclined to feel that SS and friends should
> insist on exactly 2 digits. If you want to allow 1-or-2-digits then use
> FMSS, just like the error message tells you. (However, I have a vague
> feeling that Oracle doesn't insist on this, and in the end we ought to
> follow Oracle's behavior. Can anyone check?)
Oracle doesn't insist on it.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2008-12-02 09:35:30 | contrib/pg_stat_statements 1202 |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2008-12-02 06:00:06 | Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) |