Re: extract vs date_part

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas Lockhart
Тема Re: extract vs date_part
Дата
Msg-id 3A8D8B32.EE7C04E9@alumni.caltech.edu
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на extract vs date_part  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
> (Using ColId instead of datetime + IDENT gives reduce/reduce conflicts
> that I don't want to mess with now.)
> The date_part implementation is prepared for unknown field selectors, so
> this should be all safe.  Comments?

Works for me. Since extract required explicit reserved words, I had just
implemented the ones specified in the SQL9x standard. Your extension
patch is a great idea, as long as others agree it can go into the beta
(afaict this is an extremely low risk fix).
                     - Thomas


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: age() function not to spec, date subtraction?
Следующее
От: "Rod Taylor"
Дата:
Сообщение: SPI_Free() causes backend to close.