Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71953633371
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:05:04 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 33291-06 for
	<pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:04:48 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-fx0-f210.google.com (mail-fx0-f210.google.com
	[209.85.220.210])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D9F632176
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:04:53 -0300 (ADT)
Received: by fxm6 with SMTP id 6so9534427fxm.19
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:04:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject
	:from:to:content-type;
	bh=8ZHr8uA1+0As8FxbPfP2z/olIPJJ5BTPk9wQAvwkLpQ=;
	b=QWZS6pkUqDv5j4qcUaGjpctm+9MK5x8lUhUyeReEFpzi7gc+tYCa3F/mLjrj7/xypu
	RzJpGnpymNEsjMvoMewwQbNgDsoKh039fBE3yBT6P6HYOpCQmNt7g8No4hj/uE/zs828
	t9zyaMVw6mPkSNcDWQCT/Y9rCaWG2jct1c7yI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
	b=KzGpvhMOEybVZcHPuGZ45MIZFaQ4MoUhEYNplj+KBuIQtaSvZBPweA4b8+WZRvdm+U
	mvaC+xfPFXOrpCOSPgZX9h8E235MU4Ft2U52JE+oxIZDGUvSLWaBja5SlIkFJigVPy6v
	TFuCLtNfti2NM61VM73F9oK1duV+gkfZhtBj4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.32.79 with SMTP id b15mr10206125bkd.47.1256245490804;
 Thu,
	22 Oct 2009 14:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:04:50 -0400
Message-ID: <22431f1b0910221404i52040b19s7c89f6dda4ae187d@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: date + interval year - why is the return type convered to a
	timestamp?
From: the6campbells <the6campbells@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032556054a3ae9f604768c7232
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.04 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=0.558,
	BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200910/114
X-Sequence-Number: 33313

--00032556054a3ae9f604768c7232
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Why is Postgres returning a timestamp instead of the expected date data type
for the first expression (the second returns a date)?

In other words, is this a known bug or is it design intent. The manuals did
not seem to appear to say this is intentional behaviour but is not SQL
standard.

select date '2001-03-30' - interval '1' year, date '2001-03-30' - integer
'365' from tversion

--00032556054a3ae9f604768c7232
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div>Why is Postgres returning a timestamp instead of the expected date dat=
a type for the first expression (the second returns a date)?=A0</div><div><=
br></div><div>In other words, is this a known bug or is it design intent. T=
he manuals did not seem to appear to say this is intentional behaviour but =
is not SQL standard.</div>
<div><br></div><div><blockquote class=3D"webkit-indent-blockquote" style=3D=
"margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">select date &#39;2001-03-=
30&#39; - interval &#39;1&#39; year, date &#39;2001-03-30&#39; - integer &#=
39;365&#39; from tversion</blockquote>
</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>

--00032556054a3ae9f604768c7232--