BUG #16747: Unexpected behaviour of the overlaps function

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От PG Bug reporting form
Тема BUG #16747: Unexpected behaviour of the overlaps function
Дата
Msg-id 16747-cafc5e9e88e8c5b3@postgresql.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: BUG #16747: Unexpected behaviour of the overlaps function  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-bugs
The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference:      16747
Logged by:          Paul Luchyn
Email address:      ddiamondbbackk@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 11.8
Operating system:   Windows
Description:

Hello!

I'm working with the "overlaps" function.
In my humble opinion it works incorrectly in one case.
I have prepared some examples.

1) Two intervals with zero duration: SELECT (TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29
12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000') OVERLAPS (TIMESTAMP
'2020-11-29 12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000'); ,the result
is "true", looks fine.
2) Interval with zero duration, and non-zero interval: SELECT (TIMESTAMP
'2020-11-29 12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000') OVERLAPS
(TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:02:00.000');
,the result is "true", looks fine.
3) Two intervals with non-zero duration: SELECT (TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29
12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:01:00.000') OVERLAPS (TIMESTAMP
'2020-11-29 12:01:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:02:00.000'); , the
result is false. The last case looks suspicious: logically these two
intervals don't overlap, but they have common moment of time (2020-11-29
12:01:00.000).

And one more question: is there any other function which will do the trick
in the situation described in the last example?


В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Oleksandr Shulgin
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Ошибка_установки_postgresql 11_в_ windows
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #16736: SCRAM authentication is not supported by this driver