On 03 October 2013 19:30 Bruce Momjian wrote: >On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:54:14AM +0530, Rushabh Lathia wrote: >> Thanks Bruce. >> >> Yes for me main problem was to make assumption that a 5-digit number >> is a year, as was bit worried about side effect of that assumption in >> the date/time module. I did tested patch shared by you with various >> test and so far it looks good to me. >> >> I would like reviewer to review/test the patch and share his comments. >> >> Attaching the git patch again with this mail. >> >> Assigning to Reviewer.
>Oh, great. If everyone likes it I can apply it. With Year length of 6 digits has some inconsistency problem, The tests are carried out on a default configuration. select timestamptz '199910108 01:01:01 IST'; -- works select timestamptz '19991 01 08 01:01:01 IST'; -- works select timestamptz '1999100108 01:01:01 IST'; -- works select timestamptz '199910 01 08 01:01:01 IST'; -- Not working select timestamptz 'January 8, 19991 01:01:01 IST'; -- works select timestamptz 'January 8, 199910 01:01:01 IST'; -- Not working CREATE TABLE TIMESTAMPTZ_TST (a int , b timestamptz); INSERT INTO TIMESTAMPTZ_TST VALUES(1, '100000312 23:58:48 IST'); -- works INSERT INTO TIMESTAMPTZ_TST VALUES(2, '10000 03 12 23:58:48 IST'); -- works INSERT INTO TIMESTAMPTZ_TST VALUES(3, '1000000312 23:58:48 IST'); -- works INSERT INTO TIMESTAMPTZ_TST VALUES(4, '100000 03 12 23:58:48 IST'); -- Not working please correct me if anything wrong in the tests. Regards, Hari babu. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
