Re: Bug in tm2timestamp

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug in tm2timestamp
Date: 2013-03-06 19:57:42
Message-ID: 20130306195742.GU9507@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:08:26PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Another point worth considering is that most of this is duplicated by
> > ecpg's libpgtypes. Do we want to fix that one too, or do we just let it
> > continue to be broken? I note that other bugs are already unfixed in
> > ecpg's copy. One other idea to consider is moving these things to
>
> Meaning that a fix wasn't put there, too?

Yes, a fix was put there by Tom (which is why I retracted my comment
initially). I did note that the ecpg code has diverged from the backend
code; it's not unlikely that other bug fixes have not gone to the ecpg
copy. But I didn't investigate each difference in detail.

> > But in light of this bug and other already fixed date/time bugs, perhaps
> > it's warranted? Opinions please.
>
> I'd love to go to a single source. Most of libpgtypes was taken from the
> backend back when it was developed.

I will keep that in mind, if I get back to moving the timestamp/datetime
code to src/common. It's not a high priority item right now.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2013-03-06 20:26:31 Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2013-03-06 19:50:06 Re: Bug in tm2timestamp