Обсуждение: BUG #15551: Date/Time comparison not correct when the comparison isinside join clause and involves "+" or "-"
BUG #15551: Date/Time comparison not correct when the comparison isinside join clause and involves "+" or "-"
От
PG Bug reporting form
Дата:
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 15551 Logged by: Lei He Email address: whereverlei@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 11.1 Operating system: macOS Mojave 10.14 Description: dil=# select version(); version ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PostgreSQL 11.1 on x86_64-apple-darwin18.2.0, compiled by Apple LLVM version 10.0.0 (clang-1000.11.45.5), 64-bit (1 row) I want to compute growth of something quarterly. Here is the simplified data: with code_time as ( select code, "time" from (values ('000001', date '2016-12-31'), ('000001', date '2017-03-31'), ('000001', date '2017-06-30'), ('000001', date '2017-09-30'), ('000001', date '2017-12-31'), ('000001', date '2018-03-31'), ('000001', date '2018-06-30'), ('000001', date '2018-09-30'), ('000001', date '2018-12-31'), ('000002', date '2016-12-31'), ('000002', date '2017-03-31'), ('000002', date '2017-06-30'), ('000002', date '2017-09-30'), ('000002', date '2017-12-31'), ('000002', date '2018-03-31'), ('000002', date '2018-06-30'), ('000002', date '2018-09-30'), ('000002', date '2018-12-31') ) t("code", "time") ) The result I need is like this: code | cur_quarter | pre_quarter --------+-------------+------------- 000001 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000001 | 2017-06-30 | 2017-03-31 000001 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000001 | 2017-12-31 | 2017-09-30 000001 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000001 | 2018-06-30 | 2018-03-31 000001 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000001 | 2018-12-31 | 2018-09-30 000002 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000002 | 2017-06-30 | 2017-03-31 000002 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000002 | 2017-12-31 | 2017-09-30 000002 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000002 | 2018-06-30 | 2018-03-31 000002 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000002 | 2018-12-31 | 2018-09-30 If I use query select ct1.code, ct1."time" cur_quarter, ct2."time" pre_quarter from code_time ct1 join (select code, "time" from code_time) ct2 on ct1.code = ct2.code and ct1."time" = ct2."time" + interval '3 months' order by ct1.code, ct1."time"; I got: code | cur_quarter | pre_quarter --------+-------------+------------- 000001 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000001 | 2017-06-30 | 2017-03-31 000001 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000001 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000001 | 2018-06-30 | 2018-03-31 000001 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000002 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000002 | 2017-06-30 | 2017-03-31 000002 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000002 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000002 | 2018-06-30 | 2018-03-31 000002 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 Note: the fourth quarter (*-12-31) of all years are missing. If I use query select ct1.code, ct1."time" cur_quarter, ct2."time" pre_quarter from code_time ct1 join (select code, "time" from code_time) ct2 on ct1.code = ct2.code and ct2."time" = ct1."time" - interval '3 months' order by ct1.code, ct1."time"; I got: code | cur_quarter | pre_quarter --------+-------------+------------- 000001 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000001 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000001 | 2017-12-31 | 2017-09-30 000001 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000001 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000001 | 2018-12-31 | 2018-09-30 000002 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000002 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000002 | 2017-12-31 | 2017-09-30 000002 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000002 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000002 | 2018-12-31 | 2018-09-30 Note: the second quarter (*-06-30) of all years are missing. Only if I use query select ct1.code, ct1."time" cur_quarter, ct2."time" pre_quarter from code_time ct1 join (select code, "time" from code_time) ct2 on ct1.code = ct2.code and ( ct1."time" = ct2."time" + interval '3 months' or ct2."time" = ct1."time" - interval '3 months' ) order by ct1.code, ct1."time"; can I get the expected result: code | cur_quarter | pre_quarter --------+-------------+------------- 000001 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000001 | 2017-06-30 | 2017-03-31 000001 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000001 | 2017-12-31 | 2017-09-30 000001 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000001 | 2018-06-30 | 2018-03-31 000001 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000001 | 2018-12-31 | 2018-09-30 000002 | 2017-03-31 | 2016-12-31 000002 | 2017-06-30 | 2017-03-31 000002 | 2017-09-30 | 2017-06-30 000002 | 2017-12-31 | 2017-09-30 000002 | 2018-03-31 | 2017-12-31 000002 | 2018-06-30 | 2018-03-31 000002 | 2018-09-30 | 2018-06-30 000002 | 2018-12-31 | 2018-09-30 The only difference among these query lies in the join clause involving date / time comparison having date / time operators being used: 1st: ct1."time" = ct2."time" + interval '3 months' 2nd: ct2."time" = ct1."time" - interval '3 months' 3rd: ct1."time" = ct2."time" + interval '3 months' or ct2."time" = ct1."time" - interval '3 months' It seems to me all the 3 conditions are logically same and should have the same result.
>>>>> "PG" == PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes: PG> Note: the fourth quarter (*-12-31) of all years are missing. So the problem here is that you're trying to identify quarters by the _last_ date, not by the _first_ date. If you add 3 months to Sept 30th, you get Dec 30th, NOT Dec 31st. It so happens that adding 3 months to Mar 31st gives Jun 30th, and adding 3 months to Jun 30th gives Sep 30th, and adding 3 months to Dec 31st gives Mar 31st, so it's only the one case that fails here. But if you identify the quarter by its _first_ date, you have no problem. date_trunc('quarter', somedate::timestamp) can help with this, but remember to cast the date to timestamp (without time zone) in the call, otherwise you'll get incorrect results due to timezone issues. PG> The only difference among these query lies in the join clause PG> involving date / time comparison having date / time operators being PG> used: PG> 1st: ct1."time" = ct2."time" + interval '3 months' PG> 2nd: ct2."time" = ct1."time" - interval '3 months' PG> 3rd: ct1."time" = ct2."time" + interval '3 months' or ct2."time" = PG> ct1."time" - interval '3 months' PG> It seems to me all the 3 conditions are logically same and should PG> have the same result. Well, in the presence of months of variable lengths, they clearly are not equivalent and cannot be. So no bug here. -- Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)