From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
cc: msdnchina@163.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18034: Accept the spelling "+infinity" in datetime input is
 not accurate
In-reply-to: <ZNRN1aF0Ls2SbleN@momjian.us>
References: <18034-08e668401be826ed@postgresql.org>
 <ZNRN1aF0Ls2SbleN@momjian.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
	message dated "Wed, 09 Aug 2023 22:39:17 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <26521.1691636007.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2023 22:53:27 -0400
Message-ID: <26522.1691636007@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/26522.1691636007%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> in the https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/release-16.html, there is a new
>> feature ：Accept the spelling "+infinity" in datetime input。
>> Actually，"in datetime input " is not accurate.
>> Actually, in the PostgreSQL 16 beta2 edition, the spelling "+infinity" can
>> be used in the following three datatypes:
>> 1.timestamp [ (p) ] [ without time zone ]
>> 2.timestamp [ (p) ] with time zone
>> 3.date
>> 
>> and the spelling "+infinity" can not be used in the   following two
>> datatypes:
>> 1.time [ (p) ] [ without time zone ]
>> 2.time [ (p) ] with time zone

> We call our timestamp type datetime in some cases, e.g.:
> ...
> I see it in a few other places.  Should we rename it other places too? 
> I thought datetime was just a short-hand for our date-time types.

I don't see much reason to change anything here.  "Datetime" is not
a perfectly strict classification, eg it might or might not include
"interval" depending on context, and I don't want to try to make
that exact.

A more specific release note entry could be "Accept the spelling
'+infinity' for datetime types that accept infinity"; but I'm not
sure it's worth the extra verbiage.

			regards, tom lane