Re: BUG #12782: Some abnormal observation about the to_date() function in greenplum database

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: patl659in(at)rediffmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #12782: Some abnormal observation about the to_date() function in greenplum database
Date: 2015-02-18 16:54:57
Message-ID: 11970.1424278497@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

patl659in(at)rediffmail(dot)com writes:
> Grennplum 4.3 64 bit

You would really need to take this up with Greenplum. Most of these test
cases would fail outright in any community-supported Postgres version,
because to_date takes type text not date. I suspect they are not actually
bugs but user error ... but in any case, pgsql-bugs is not Greenplum's
support department.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message gibheer 2015-02-18 19:27:12 BUG #12784: pg_relation_size has problems with case in index name
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-02-18 16:45:13 Re: BUG #12779: pg_dump -Fd doesn't care about -Z