On Tue, 17 September 2013 14:33 Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>>On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Haribabu kommi
>><haribabu.ko...@huawei.com<mailto:haribabu.ko...@huawei.com>> wrote:
>>>On 14 August 2013 Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>>>postgres=# create table test ( a timestamptz);
>>>CREATE TABLE
>>>-- Date with year 1000
>>>postgres=# insert into test values ( 'Sat Mar 11 23:58:48 1000 IST');
>>>INSERT 0 1
>>>-- Now try with year 10000 it will return error
>>>postgres=# insert into test values ( 'Sat Mar 11 23:58:48 10000 IST');
>>>ERROR: invalid input syntax for type timestamp with time zone: "Sat Mar 11
>>>23:58:48 10000 IST"
>>>LINE 1: insert into test values ( 'Sat Mar 11 23:58:48 10000 IST');
>>Patch applies cleanly to HEAD. As this patch tries to improve in inserting
>>the date of the year value to be more than 4 in length.
>>But it didn't solve all the ways to insert the year field more than 4 in
>>length. Please check the following test.
>>postgres=# insert into test values ('10001010 10:10:10 IST');
>>INSERT 0 1
>>postgres=# insert into test values ('100011010 10:10:10 IST');
>>ERROR: invalid input syntax for type timestamp with time zone: "100011010
>>10:10:10 IST" at character 26
>>STATEMENT: insert into test values ('100011010 10:10:10 IST');
>>ERROR: invalid input syntax for type timestamp with time zone: "100011010
>>10:10:10 IST"
>>LINE 1: insert into test values ('100011010 10:10:10 IST');
^
>>I feel it is better to provide the functionality of inserting year field
>>more than 4 in length in all flows.
>+1. Nice catch.
>Here is the latest version of patch which handles the functionality in all
>flows.
>Could you test it and share you comments.
I am getting some other failures with the updated patch also, please check the
following tests.
select date 'January 8, 19990';
select timestamptz 'January 8, 199910 01:01:01 IST';
INSERT INTO TIMESTAMPTZ_TST VALUES(4, '10001 SAT 8 MAR 10:10:10 IST');
you can get the test scripts from regress test files of date.sql, timetz.sql,
timestamp.sql and timestamptz.sql
and modify according to the patch for verification.
I feel changing the year value to accept the length (>4) is not simple.
So many places the year length crossing more than length 4 is not considered.
Search in the code with "yyyy" and correct all related paths.
Regards,
Hari babu.
