Обсуждение: ISO 8601 Intervals
All, I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. Is http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00121.php stillthe consensus? I.E. rip out the current pseudo-iso code, and replace it with genuine ISO8601 code? I tried(!) to e-mail Ron Mayer, but got a bounce :( Thanks, LER -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3683 US
On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: > I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax (PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortunate choice to call durations, i.e., lengths of time, intervals.) Michael Glaesemann grzm myrealbox com
Michael Glaesemann wrote: > On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: > >> I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. > > Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax > (PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortunate > choice to call durations, i.e., lengths of time, intervals.) Yes. LER -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3683 US
Larry Rosenman wrote: > Michael Glaesemann wrote: >>On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. >> >>Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax >>(PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortunate >>choice to call durations, i.e., lengths of time, intervals.) Back in 2003 I submitted such a patch [1,1b] that resulted in a fair amount of discussion including some still (AFAIK) open issues about the naming of the datestyle settings to control it [2,3,4]. There was also some discussion of the range off ISO 8601 durations to support (ISO 8601 Basic Format, ISO 8601 Alternative Format, and ISO 8601 Extended Format (which is more human-readable)) [5]. Finally, there is a similar, but different syntax currently supported by postgresql (where '1Y1M' means 1 year 1 minute, while ISO 'P1Y1M' would mean 1 year 1 month) and Tom recommended ripping that code out[7] and at one point said my patch was looking cleaner than the exiting code [8]. My patch does not yet rip that out. I still use the patch myself, but don't have it updated to CVS tip. I'd be happy to do so if people want that as a starting point. Ron [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00103.php [1b] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00286.php [2] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00122.php [3] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00129.php [4] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00130.php [5] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00133.php [6] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00134.php [7] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00134.php [8] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00121.php
One more link... this http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-12/msg00049.php was the final draft of the patch I submitted, with docs patches, that did not break backward computability (did not rip out the old syntax) and supported both input and output of ISO-8601 compliant intervals by setting the datestyle to "iso8601basic" as discussed in the thread linked in the quoted article below. It was applied http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-12/msg00253.php and then debated http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-12/msg00202.php and then unapplied http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-12/msg00030.php on Peter Eisentraut's recommendation to implement SQL standard intervals first. Ron Mayer wrote: > Larry Rosenman wrote: > >> Michael Glaesemann wrote: >> >>> On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> >>>> I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. >>> >>> >>> Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax >>> (PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortunate >>> choice to call durations, i.e., lengths of time, intervals.) > > > Back in 2003 I submitted such a patch [1,1b] that resulted in a fair > amount of discussion including some still (AFAIK) open issues > about the naming of the datestyle settings to control it [2,3,4]. > > There was also some discussion of the range off ISO 8601 durations > to support (ISO 8601 Basic Format, ISO 8601 Alternative Format, > and ISO 8601 Extended Format (which is more human-readable)) [5]. > > Finally, there is a similar, but different syntax currently supported > by postgresql (where '1Y1M' means 1 year 1 minute, while ISO 'P1Y1M' > would mean 1 year 1 month) and Tom recommended ripping that code > out[7] and at one point said my patch was looking cleaner than > the exiting code [8]. My patch does not yet rip that out. > > > I still use the patch myself, but don't have it updated to CVS tip. > I'd be happy to do so if people want that as a starting point. > > Ron > > > [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00103.php > [1b] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00286.php > [2] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00122.php > [3] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00129.php > [4] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00130.php > [5] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00133.php > [6] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00134.php > [7] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00134.php > > [8] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-09/msg00121.php