Re: to_date()/to_timestamp() silently accept month=0 and day=0

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: to_date()/to_timestamp() silently accept month=0 and day=0
Date: 2026-04-30 22:57:22
Message-ID: afPeUhP7I5zF4kXo@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 07:44:24PM +0530, Ayush Tiwari wrote:
> I'll add this to the commitfest, so that we can circle back on this
> once v20 development starts.
>
> I think parallely we can commit Daniel's v2 patch, since
> that correctly documents what Postgres has right now, and we'll
> know what exactly to change if we decide to go the other way.

I'll leave that up to Daniel, I guess, as he has sent the patch.

All this stuff qualifies as v20 to me, including the new tests. Now,
I don't see a reason against committing the new tests now. I doubt
that this are going to impact the buildfarm, and we are still early in
the beta period. I may be wrong about the buildfarm part, of course.

:)
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Guo 2026-05-01 00:26:32 Re: BUG #19418: SQL/JSON JSON_VALUE() does not conform to ISO/IEC 9075-2:2023(E) 6.34 <JSON value constructor>
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2026-04-30 22:04:54 Re: BUG #19418: SQL/JSON JSON_VALUE() does not conform to ISO/IEC 9075-2:2023(E) 6.34 <JSON value constructor>