BUG #16747: Unexpected behaviour of the overlaps function

From: PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: ddiamondbbackk(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: BUG #16747: Unexpected behaviour of the overlaps function
Date: 2020-11-26 15:24:27
Message-ID: 16747-cafc5e9e88e8c5b3@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference: 16747
Logged by: Paul Luchyn
Email address: ddiamondbbackk(at)gmail(dot)com
PostgreSQL version: 11.8
Operating system: Windows
Description:

Hello!

I'm working with the "overlaps" function.
In my humble opinion it works incorrectly in one case.
I have prepared some examples.

1) Two intervals with zero duration: SELECT (TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29
12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000') OVERLAPS (TIMESTAMP
'2020-11-29 12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000'); ,the result
is "true", looks fine.
2) Interval with zero duration, and non-zero interval: SELECT (TIMESTAMP
'2020-11-29 12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000') OVERLAPS
(TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:02:00.000');
,the result is "true", looks fine.
3) Two intervals with non-zero duration: SELECT (TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29
12:00:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:01:00.000') OVERLAPS (TIMESTAMP
'2020-11-29 12:01:00.000', TIMESTAMP '2020-11-29 12:02:00.000'); , the
result is false. The last case looks suspicious: logically these two
intervals don't overlap, but they have common moment of time (2020-11-29
12:01:00.000).

And one more question: is there any other function which will do the trick
in the situation described in the last example?

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-11-26 15:54:59 Re: BUG #16736: SCRAM authentication is not supported by this driver
Previous Message Oleksandr Shulgin 2020-11-26 12:54:24 Re: Ошибка_установки_postgresql 11_в_ windows