Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David G. Johnston
Тема Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not
Дата
Msg-id CAKFQuwY9XtAbSmRA2VZ2eHEZmktT2oDqqMbQKR=fsJfosmWX8w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not  (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>)
Ответы Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not  (Braiam <braiamp@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Дерево обсуждения
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:36 AM PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference:      18007
Logged by:          Braiam Peguero
Email address:      braiamp+pg@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 15.3
Operating system:   Debian
Description:       

There's no much difference between timestamp and dateT00:00:00.000, yet
using age(date, date)

There is no "age(date, date)" function.  Only age(timestamp, timestamp)

for some reason internally doesn't type coerce
correctly into the appropriated types.

Nope, type coercion happens before the function call, while figuring out which function signature to choose.
 
I remember that on a previous
versions (not sure if it was 14) this wasn't the case, so I would consider
this a regression.

You haven't provided any code demonstrating what you think is incorrect.

David J.

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: PG Bug reporting form
Дата:
Сообщение: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not