| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 7.2 and current timestamp bug? |
| Date: | 2002-02-16 19:03:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20702.1013886223@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Shouldn't timestamp_in detect the invalid timestamp value when it is
> inserted?
Yeah. A simpler test case is
regression=# select '2465001-01-01 00:00:00'::timestamp;
ERROR: Unable to format timestamp with time zone; internal coding error
IMHO the IS_VALID_JULIAN() macro ought to test for out-of-range in the
forward direction as well as rearward. The immediate problem in this
example is that date2j() overflows --- silently --- producing a negative
result which later confuses timestamp2tm. We could limit the allowed
range of Julian dates to prevent that.
Another possibility is to allow date2j and j2date to pass/return double
instead of int, but that is a larger change and probably not very safe
to apply for 7.2.1.
Thomas, your thoughts?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2002-02-16 20:20:28 | Re: Odd statistics behaviour in 7.2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-16 17:57:19 | Re: Odd statistics behaviour in 7.2 |