| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | ND Abelisto <abelisto(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14446: make_date with negative year |
| Date: | 2017-01-18 21:58:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20170118215859.d3i6aexgreozm6ey@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2016-12-05 19:38 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:
> > So make_date was introduced in 9.4 by commit f901bb50e; this report is
> > based on 9.5. Do we want to backpatch this change? Since the fix only
> > changes behavior that currently errors out anyway, we would not be
> > changing anything that people are relying on. I lean towards
> > backpatching all the way back to 9.4 myself.
>
> I have not a problem with backpatch - there are a user who see current
> behave as bug.
In the end, I decided against backpatching. It is not entirely out of
the question that somebody *is* depending on this erroring out if
negative years are passed. But I am acting on my own opinion only; if
there are more votes for a backpatch, I am open to changing it.
If not, we're done here and I'd like to move along.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jeff.janes | 2017-01-18 23:43:59 | BUG #14505: explain verbose for postgresql_fdw |
| Previous Message | dsuchka | 2017-01-18 14:48:28 | BUG #14504: Wrong index using via view for converted timestamp by time zone |