Re: [HACKERS] datetime regression test fails at daylight savings transitions
От | Thomas G. Lockhart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] datetime regression test fails at daylight savings transitions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3634B48B.6A955CB@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] datetime regression test fails at daylight savings transitions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] datetime regression test fails at daylight savings transitions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> Hmm. This offers a potential solution, then. I propose that "day" > ought to be considered a qualitative time interval, and that > 'now'::datetime + '1 day'::timespan > need not yield the same thing as > 'now'::datetime + '24 hours'::timespan > Changing things in that way might be infeasible because of backwards > compatibility constraints, but I think this is what the natural > interpretation would be. (Clearly it's what the writer of the > datetime regression test was expecting...) Well, no I wasn't expecting that really :) I just wanted to be sure to test 'yesterday' and 'tomorrow' behavior, and didn't want to omit those tests just because they might fail for ~1% of the year. Making 'day' a qualitative time is probably possible, just chewing up another 4 bytes of storage (for 16 bytes rather than 12). But we'll have to think it through to make sure there aren't other side effects or other no-so-expected behavior under other conditions. - Tom
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: