From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Bad canonicalization for dateranges with 'infinity' bounds
Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 14:40:52 +0200
Message-ID: <77f24ea19ab802bc9bc60ddbb8977ee2d646aec1.camel@cybertec.at> (raw)
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/rangetypes.html#RANGETYPES-INFINITE has:
Also, some element types have a notion of “infinity”, but that is just
another value so far as the range type mechanisms are concerned.
For example, in timestamp ranges, [today,] means the same thing as [today,).
But [today,infinity] means something different from [today,infinity) —
the latter excludes the special timestamp value infinity.
This does not work as expected for ranges with discrete base types,
notably daterange:
test=> SELECT '[2000-01-01,infinity]'::daterange;
daterange
-----------------------
[2000-01-01,infinity)
(1 row)
test=> SELECT '(-infinity,2000-01-01)'::daterange;
daterange
------------------------
[-infinity,2000-01-01)
(1 row)
This is because "daterange_canonical" makes no difference for 'infinity',
and adding one to infinity does not change the value.
I propose the attached patch which fixes the problem.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Bad canonicalization for dateranges with 'infinity' bounds
In-Reply-To: <77f24ea19ab802bc9bc60ddbb8977ee2d646aec1.camel@cybertec.at>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox