From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |
Date: | 2005-03-23 23:32:38 |
Message-ID: | 15680.1111620758@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Tom> In particular we have to consider the behavior of the input
> Tom> and output routines for cases like COPY.
> Hmm, but COPY is non-standard, so I'd be happy that it insisted on
> postgres interval syntax.
It's not different from
INSERT INTO foo VALUES('1 year 1 month');
Nothing nonstandard about that that I can see.
> ANSI interval syntax is confusing in this
> context, precisely because there is nowhere to actually put an
> 'interval qualifier' in the literals.
Yes. The ISO design for the datatype is pretty brain-dead if you ask
me --- the basic meaning of a data literal shouldn't be so dependent
on context. Still, it's there, and we should make some effort towards
supporting all but the really awfulest parts of it ;-)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Roy Badami | 2005-03-23 23:42:36 | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-03-23 23:28:28 | Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser, |