Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
| От | Neil Conway |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 428C2467.6090904@samurai.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
Tom Lane wrote: > Sorry, s/downcased/downcased and null-terminated/. I have not read the > parsing code in question lately, but offhand it seems like transferring > one token at a time into a work buffer isn't a completely broken idea... I wouldn't call it "broken", but I don't see how it could be done without a significant refactoring of how datetime parsing is done, and your handwaving has yet to convince me :) The gist of the current code is: 1. parse the input string into fields, which are arrays of pointers into a working buffer, via ParseDateTime() 2. decode the fields as appropriate for the datatype via DecodeInterval(), DecodeDatetime(), DecodeTimeOnly(), etc. i.e. I don't see an easy way to do field decoding one field at a time. -Neil
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: