> On 19 Jan 2024, at 08:24, David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > You are mixing POSIX and ISO-8601 conventions and, as noted in our appendix, > they disagree on the direction that is positive.
Thanks! Now everything seems on its place.
I want to include in the patch following tests:
-- extract UUID v1, v6 and v7 timestamp
SELECT uuid_extract_time('C232AB00-9414-11EC-B3C8-9F6BDECED846') = 'Tuesday,
February 22, 2022 2:22:22.00 PM GMT+05:00';
SELECT uuid_extract_time('1EC9414C-232A-6B00-B3C8-9F6BDECED846') = 'Tuesday,
February 22, 2022 2:22:22.00 PM GMT+05:00';
SELECT uuid_extract_time('017F22E2-79B0-7CC3-98C4-DC0C0C07398F') = 'Tuesday,
February 22, 2022 2:22:22.00 PM GMT+05:00';
How do you think, will it be stable all across buildfarm? Or should we change
anything to avoid false positives inferred from different timestamp parsing?
> On 19 Jan 2024, at 07:58, Lukas Fittl <lu...@fittl.com> wrote:
>
> Note how calling the uuidv7 function again after having called it with a
> fixed future timestamp, returns the future timestamp, even though it should
> return the current time.
Thanks for the review.
Well, that was intentional. But now I see it's kind of confusing behaviour.
I've changed it to more expected version.
Also, I've added some documentation on all functions.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
v11-0001-Implement-UUID-v7-as-per-IETF-draft.patch
Description: Binary data
