Re: [HACKERS] Bug in to_timestamp().

From: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, amul sul <sul_amul(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)in>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bug in to_timestamp().
Date: 2018-09-06 11:40:41
Message-ID: CAPpHfdsNJBXNGf2cOk_G7wVMkUsWhu85ibf42U2savS8OCy3HA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:28 PM amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 6:35 PM Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:10 PM amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:05 PM Alexander Korotkov
>> > <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:22 AM David G. Johnston
>> > > <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > > > From those results the question is how important is it to force the following breakage on our users (i.e., introduce FX exact symbol matching):
>> > > >
>> > > > SELECT to_timestamp('97/Feb/16', 'FXYY:Mon:DD');
>> > > > - to_timestamp
>> > > > -------------------------------
>> > > > - Sun Feb 16 00:00:00 1997 PST
>> > > > -(1 row)
>> > > > -
>> > > > +ERROR: unexpected character "/", expected character ":"
>> > > > +HINT: In FX mode, punctuation in the input string must exactly match the format string.
>> > > >
>> > > > There seemed to be some implicit approvals of this breakage some 30 emails and 10 months ago but given that this is the only change from a correct result to a failure I'd like to officially put it out there for opinion/vote gathering. Mine is a -1; though keeping the distinction between space and non-alphanumeric characters is expected.
>> > >
>> > > Do I understand correctly that you're -1 to changes to FX mode, but no
>> > > objection to changes in non-FX mode?
>> > >
>> > Ditto.
>>
>> So, if no objections for non-FX mode changes, then I'll extract that
>> part and commit it separately.
>
>
> Yeah, that make sense to me, thank you.

OK! I've removed FX changes from the patch. The result is attached.
I'm going to commit this if no objections.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-to-timestamp-format-checking-v18.patch application/octet-stream 18.4 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Travers 2018-09-06 11:44:00 Re: Funny hang on PostgreSQL 10 during parallel index scan on slave
Previous Message Chris Travers 2018-09-06 11:31:43 Re: Funny hang on PostgreSQL 10 during parallel index scan on slave