Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 15680.1111620758@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, (Roy Badami <roy@gnomon.org.uk>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,
Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
Roy Badami <roy@gnomon.org.uk> writes:
> Tom> In particular we have to consider the behavior of the input
> Tom> and output routines for cases like COPY.
> Hmm, but COPY is non-standard, so I'd be happy that it insisted on
> postgres interval syntax.
It's not different from
INSERT INTO foo VALUES('1 year 1 month');
Nothing nonstandard about that that I can see.
> ANSI interval syntax is confusing in this
> context, precisely because there is nowhere to actually put an
> 'interval qualifier' in the literals.
Yes. The ISO design for the datatype is pretty brain-dead if you ask
me --- the basic meaning of a data literal shouldn't be so dependent
on context. Still, it's there, and we should make some effort towards
supporting all but the really awfulest parts of it ;-)
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: