Re: What happened to the is_ family of functions proposal?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Colin 't Hart
Тема Re: What happened to the is_ family of functions proposal?
Дата
Msg-id AANLkTi=b799xu1qfrPaLh7vEz8fYW+ihqs+Cze=ks2nO@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: What happened to the is_ family of functions proposal?  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Ответы Re: What happened to the is_ family of functions proposal?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 20 September 2010 16:54, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 09/20/2010 10:29 AM, Colin 't Hart wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Back in 2002 these were proposed, what happened to them?
>>
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2002-09/msg00406.php
>
>
> 2002 is a looooooooong time ago.

<snip>

> I think to_date is the wrong gadget to use here. You should probably be using the date input routine and trapping any
dataexception. e.g.: 
>
>    test_date := date_in(textout(some_text));
>
> In plpgsql you'd put that inside a begin/exception/end block that traps SQLSTATE '22000' which is the class covering
dataexceptions. 

So it's not possible using pure SQL unless one writes a function?

Are the is_<type> family of functions still desired?

Also, where are the to_<type> conversions done?

Thanks,

Colin


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Markus Wanner
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: bg worker: general purpose requirements
Следующее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Do we need a ShmList implementation?