| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Hunsaker <hunsakerbn(at)ldschurch(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, hunsakerbn(at)familysearch(dot)org, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #11883: Year 1500 not treated as leap year when it was a leap year |
| Date: | 2014-11-07 07:02:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20141107070257.GA29045@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 07:29:49AM -0700, Bruce Hunsaker wrote:
> > I have applied the attached C comment to document why we use the
> > Gregorian calendar for pre-1582 years.
>
> Thanks everyone for the response. I guess the bottom line for us
> is that if we want to store dates before 1582, we may not want
> to use date or timestamp columns for that data, particularly if
> the dates are from a Julian calendar.
Yeah, the big problem is that there is no way to store leap days for
years like 1500. The only good part is that the Gregorian calendar is
very good at keeping the calendar aligned with the seasons.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-11-07 13:24:45 | Re: [HACKERS] ltree::text not immutable? |
| Previous Message | dimon99901 | 2014-11-07 06:21:22 | BUG #11903: Segmentation fault |