Re: Re: Proposed changing the definition of decade for date_trunc and extract

On 02/08/14 12:32, David G Johnston wrote:

Any supporting arguments for 1-10 = 1st decade other than technical
perfection?  I guess if you use data around and before 1AD you care about
this more, and rightly so, but given sound arguments for both methods the
one more useful to more users who I suspect dominantly care about years >
1900.

So -1 to change for breaking backward compatibility and -1 because the
current behavior seems to be more useful in everyday usage.

Since there was no year zero: then it follows that the first decade comprises years 1 to 10, and the current Millennium started in 2001 - or am I being too logical???   :-)