Its not a bug its a feature! Re: Date Return must be As per Natural Calander

On Monday 24 February 2003 05:59 pm, you wrote:
> [rob(at)camel rms_db]$ cal 9 1752
> September 1752
> Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
> 1 2 14 15 16
> 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
> 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
>
> I guess adding 1http://www.genfair.com/dates.htm day to 1752-09-02 should
give us 1752-09-14, but your
> right, it gives us 1752-09-03.
>
> Forwarding this to -bugs

take a look at this website!

http://www.genfair.com/dates.htm

i quote:::::::::
The cause of ambiguities - 1. Julian vs. Gregorian

Unfortunately the sixteenth century was a time of severe religious division
right across Europe. States still obedient to the Papacy adopted the
Gregorian calendar at once, that is in October 1582. These were Spain,
Portugal and Italy, with France following in December of that year, and
Prussia, the Catholic States of Germany, Holland and Flanders on 1st January
1583. Catholic parts of Switzerland followed in the next two years, Poland
went Gregorian in 1586 and Hungary in 1587. In the year 1700 the German and
Netherland Protestant States and Denmark adopted the Gregorian calendar.
Sweden wavered, keeping the Gregorian non-leap year of 1700 but reverting
back in 1712 by having two leap days that year. The Swedes finally settled
for the Gregorian calendar in 1753 omitting the eleven days from 18th to the
end of February of that year.

In Britain the Gregorian calendar was not adopted until 1752, and the start of
year date was changed to 1st January by the same Act of Parliament. The day
following 31st December 1751 was decreed to be 1st January 1752 and 2nd
September 1752 was followed by 14th September. As England had taken the year
1700 to be a leap year, the difference between the Julian and Gregorian
calendars now amounted to eleven days. The changes were to apply to all the
Dominions of the British Crown, including of course the North American
colonies, and will be the ones most of interest to family historians reading
this article.

>
>
> Robert Treat
>
> On Sun, 2003-02-23 at 11:22, Aspire Something wrote:
> > Hi all ,
> > Please Permit me to recive ur valuable knowledge and experience :-)
> >
> > In the Postgresql Documentation (read it in /7.3.2/units-history.html)
> > it has been given that Postgresql follows the Julian calander (Which
> > indead is being used by my system by default )
> >
> > So does it not mean when I add to a date (integer) it must return the
> > date as per the calendar :
> >
> > i.e
> >
> > The following sql statements
> > retuns date 1752-09-03
> > insted of 1752-09-14
> > you may do :
> > $cal 9 1752
> > on unix promt to verify (Windows user sorry ur calendar may not show
> > dates <1970 !!! atleat mine does not )
> > <code>
> > select date('1752-09-02') + 1 as some_date ;
> > some_date
> > ------------
> > 1752-09-03
> > (1 row)
> > select date('1752-09-02') + interval'1 day' as some_day;
> > some_day
> > ---------------------
> > 1752-09-03 00:00:00
> > (1 row)
> > </code>
> > Now every thing above may sound stupid but if we in near future come
> > accross the same situation how will the data base respond when my
> > database relies 90% on the timestamp value
> > their will be total mismatch of calendar(Which people follow) and
> > database returning dates.
> >
> > Regards ,
> > Aspire
> >
> > My Sys Config is
> > ==================
> > Red Hate 7.2 Kernel 2.4.7-10 on an i686
> > Postgresql 7.3.2
> > GCC 3.0.2 20010905
> > =================
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html