On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:22 AM David G. Johnston
<david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 2:30 PM, Alexander Korotkov 
> <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>>
>> The current version of patch doesn't really distinguish spaces and
>> delimiters in format string in non-FX mode.  So, spaces and delimiters
>> are forming single group.  For me Oracle behavior is ridiculous at
>> least because it doesn't allow cases when input string exactly matches
>> format string.
>>
>> This one fails:
>> SELECT to_timestamp('2018- -01 02', 'YYYY- -MM DD') FROM dual
>
> Related to below - since this works today it should continue to work.  I was 
> under the wrong impression that we followed their behavior today and were 
> pondering deviating from it because of its ridiculousness.

Right, that's just incompatibility with Oracle behavior, not with our
previous behavior.

>> > The couple of regression tests that change do so for the better.  It would 
>> > be illuminating to set this up as two patches though, one introducing all 
>> > of the new regression tests against the current code and then a second 
>> > patch with the changed behavior with only the affected tests.
>>
>> OK, here you go.  0001-to_timestamp-regression-test-v17.patch
>> introduces changes in regression tests and their output for current
>> master, while 0002-to_timestamp-format-checking-v17.patch contain
>> changes to to_timestamp itself.
>>
>
> 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?

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

Reply via email to