Hi, David! You can notice that:
1) We identified downside of changes in to_timestamp() function and documented them [1]. 2) We found 4 more differences between between patches behavior and Oracle behavior [2][3]. One of them was assumed to be ridiculous and wasn't implemented. So, I think this answers your original concern that we shouldn't copy Oracle behavior bug to bug. So, it's depends on particular case. For me, if function was introduced for Oracle compatibility, then it's OK to copy aspects of Oracle behavior that look reasonable. But if aspect doesn't look reasonable, then we don't copy it. Do you have any feedback on current state of patch? 1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180723141254.GA10168%40zakirov.localdomain 2. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdtqOSniGJRvJ2zaaE8%3DeMB8XDnzvVS-9c3Xufaw%3DiPA%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com 3. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdso_Yvbo-EXKD8t3cuAeR7wszPyuWNBdjQLi1NrMt3O5w%40mail.gmail.com ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
