Re: Bug fix for missing years in make_date()

From: Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug fix for missing years in make_date()
Date: 2015-03-31 14:34:45
Message-ID: CAKRt6CTxbE2ju+sQ8oovFkjAkHYaT1-5YJijRzJtJ6uEFWVriA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> Good point. Next patch attached.

/*
- * Note: we'll reject zero or negative year values. Perhaps negatives
- * should be allowed to represent BC years?
+ * Note: Non-positive years are taken to be BCE.
*/

Previously, zero was rejected, what does it do now? I'm sure it represents
0 AD/CE, however, is that important enough to note given that it was not
allowed previously?

-Adam

--
Adam Brightwell - adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com
Database Engineer - www.crunchydatasolutions.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gilberto Castillo 2015-03-31 14:42:06 Re: Permission select pg_stat_replication
Previous Message Gilberto Castillo 2015-03-31 14:29:44 Re: Permission select pg_stat_replication