From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
Cc: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgresql likes Tuesday... |
Date: | 2002-09-30 22:49:34 |
Message-ID: | 12398.1033426174@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
> On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 03:31, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I notice that 2001-12-31 is considered part of the first week of 2002,
>> which is also pretty surprising:
> There are at least 3 different ways to start week numbering:
> ...
> I suspect it depends on locale which should be used.
Perhaps. But I think there are two distinct issues here. One is
whether EXTRACT(week) is assigning reasonable week numbers to dates;
this depends on your convention for which day is the first of a week
as well as your convention for the first week of a year (both possibly
should depend on locale as Hannu suggests). The other issue is what
to_date(...,'WWYYYY') should do to produce a date representing a week
number. Shouldn't it always produce the first date of that week?
If not, what other conventions make sense?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Clark C. Evans | 2002-10-01 03:07:53 | Re: Postgresql likes Tuesday... |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-30 22:40:28 | Re: (Fwd) Re: Any Oracle 9 users? A test please... |