Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from
 <pgsql-hackers-owner+M300353=pgsql-hackers-arkari@postgresql.org>)
	id 1bCUUs-0001R1-B6
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:13:54 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from
 <pgsql-hackers-owner+M300353=pgsql-hackers-arkari@postgresql.org>)
	id 1bCUUr-0002TK-5k
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:13:53 +0000
Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1bCUTV-0000WH-4C
	for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:12:29 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1bCUTR-0001b7-OD
	for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:12:28 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u5DGCOxD020933;
	Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:24 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: amul sul <sul_amul@yahoo.co.in>
cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Bug in to_timestamp().
In-reply-to: <1873520224.1784572.1465833145330.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: 
 <1873520224.1784572.1465833145330.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1873520224.1784572.1465833145330.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Comments: In-reply-to amul sul <sul_amul@yahoo.co.in>
	message dated "Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:52:25 -0000"
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:24 -0400
Message-ID: <20932.1465834344@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers>
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>
List-ID: <pgsql-hackers.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

amul sul <sul_amul@yahoo.co.in> writes:
> It's look like bug in to_timestamp() function when format string has more whitespaces compare to input string, see below: 

No, I think this is a case of "input doesn't match the format string".

As a rule of thumb, using to_timestamp() for input that could be parsed
just fine by the standard timestamp input function is not a particularly
good idea.  to_timestamp() is meant to deal with input that is in a
well-defined format that happens to not be parsable by timestamp_in.
This example doesn't meet either of those preconditions.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers