| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: bug in timestamp and out of range values |
| Date: | 2006-11-03 06:18:10 |
| Message-ID: | 26714.1162534690@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> I'm not concerned about to_date so much as I am that timestamp_in lets you
> store values you can't read with timestamp_out.
Your example does not demonstrate any such thing. What it demonstrates
is that to_date will let an out-of-range date into the system, not that
timestamp_in will. Counterexample:
regression=# select '4714-01-27 BC'::timestamp;
ERROR: timestamp out of range: "4714-01-27 BC"
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marcio | 2006-11-03 11:50:01 | Sugestion for PostgreSQL Developer´s TEAM! |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-11-03 04:34:14 | Re: [HACKERS] bug in timestamp and out of range values |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-03 06:48:05 | Re: "recovering prepared transaction" after server restart message |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-11-03 04:34:14 | Re: [HACKERS] bug in timestamp and out of range values |