[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5957?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17766659#comment-17766659
]
Evgeny Stanilovsky edited comment on CALCITE-5957 at 9/19/23 6:42 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[~zabetak] as i can see from iso standard [1] : *ISO 8601 prescribes, as a
minimum, a four-digit year [YYYY] to avoid the year 2000 problem.*
So "0900-01-01" is correct while "900-01-01" is not.
Also SQL standard (6.1 chapter, Valid values for datetime fields) determines:
YEAR : 0001 to 9999
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601
was (Author: zstan):
[~zabetak] as i can see from iso standard [1] : *ISO 8601 prescribes, as a
minimum, a four-digit year [YYYY] to avoid the year 2000 problem.*
So "0900-01-01" is correct while "900-01-01" is not.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601
> Valid DATE '1945-2-2' is not accepted due to regression
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-5957
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5957
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.35.0
> Reporter: Runkang He
> Assignee: Evgeny Stanilovsky
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: avatica-1.24.0
>
> Attachments: image-2023-08-27-19-09-33-284.png
>
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> DATE '1945-2-2' is a valid date. In CALCITE-5923 when we turn on the result
> check of `testCastStringToDateTime`, we find that Calcite accepted DATE
> '1945-2-2' before CALCITE-5678 but not afterwards, so this is a regression
> that we need to fix.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
