Robert Haas writes:
> More to the point, it's also what 8.3.7 does:
Well, no, because the cases at issue are where an
is specified. 8.3 did this:
regression=# select '99 seconds'::interval second;
interval
--
00:00:39
(1 row)
and even more amusingly,
regression=# select interval '
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Sam Mason writes:
>>> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 06:32:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
There is some case to be made that we should throw error here,
which we could do by putting error tests where the attached patch
has comment
I wrote:
> Sam Mason writes:
>> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 06:32:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> There is some case to be made that we should throw error here,
>>> which we could do by putting error tests where the attached patch
>>> has comments suggesting an error test.
>> With things as they are
Sam Mason writes:
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 06:32:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There is some case to be made that we should throw error here,
>> which we could do by putting error tests where the attached patch
>> has comments suggesting an error test.
> With things as they are I think it would
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 06:32:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> regression=# select '999'::interval second;
> The correct interpretation of the input value is certainly 999 seconds.
Agreed; silent truncation like this is confusing and will lead to
unnecessary bugs in users' code.
> the attached patch
As I mentioned a bit ago
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-05/msg01505.php
there seems to be a definite problem still remaining with our handling
of interval literals. To wit, this behavior is absolutely not per spec:
regression=# select '999'::interval second;
interval
