From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Alex Ignatov <a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: amul sul <sul_amul@yahoo.co.in>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bug in to_timestamp().
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 12:26:39 -0500
Message-ID: <9091.1511112399@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171119144734.GA12415@arthur.localdomain>
References: <CA+TgmoaFQZeqmAo3CdivNu70coB=9eM5OroKYtNcTuMaC1kuUQ@mail.gmail.com>
<32684.1466704957@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<734e50cd-c563-4afd-d1c8-80f244b3265e@postgrespro.ru>
<CAFj8pRDGxe=cdcZ7pur=2WeW9O3MQCZTBEAOJfQ7OLQJaYXDvw@mail.gmail.com>
<b2a39359-3282-b402-f4a3-057aae500ee7@postgrespro.ru>
<29142.1475097531@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAKNkYny-0YJZzz=a9E==UBuiEoMA!FV=n6tik7oLbDVtahiW7tA@mail.gmail.com>
<8744.1478284597@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAKNkYnxCqwC+aXZFXent27SU5=nonR6JPxJDxfnf9YiXW71PKA@mail.gmail.com>
<29637.1511045306@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20171119144734.GA12415@arthur.localdomain>
Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru> writes:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 05:48:26PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... I see from your regression test additions that
>> you want to make some of these throw an error, and I think that any such
>> proposal is dead in the water. Nobody is going to consider it an
>> improvement if it both breaks working PG apps and disagrees with Oracle.
> Only queries with FX field throw an error.
Ah, I see --- I'd missed that FX was relevant to this. Yeah, maybe
it'd be okay to tighten up in that case, since that's making it act more
like Oracle, which seems to be generally agreed to be a good thing.
I don't much like the error message that you've got:
+SELECT to_timestamp('97/Feb/16', 'FXYY:Mon:DD');
+ERROR: unexpected character "/", expected ":"
+DETAIL: The given value did not match any of the allowed values for this field.
The DETAIL message seems to have been copied-and-pasted into a context
where it's not terribly accurate. I'd consider replacing it with
something along the lines of "HINT: In FX mode, punctuation in the input
string must exactly match the format string." This way the report will
contain a pretty clear statement of the new rule that was broken. (BTW,
it's a hint not a detail because it might be guessing wrong as to what
the real problem is.)
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru, sulamul@gmail.com, pavel.stehule@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, david.g.johnston@gmail.com, a.ignatov@postgrespro.ru, bruce@momjian.us, sul_amul@yahoo.co.in
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bug in to_timestamp().
In-Reply-To: <9091.1511112399@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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