From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Strange behavior with leap dates and centuries BC |
Date: | 2008-02-25 17:00:05 |
Message-ID: | 28390.1203958805@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> writes:
> CREATE TABLE foo(datum date);
> INSERT INTO foo VALUES('0000-02-29');
Since there is no year zero according to Gregorian reckoning, this
should have been rejected to start with.
> INSERT INTO foo VALUES('0001-02-29 BC');
> ERROR: date/time field value out of range: "0001-02-29 BC"
Yeah, something broken there too. It does know (correctly) that 1BC
is a leap year:
regression=# select '0001-02-28 BC'::date + 1;
?column?
---------------
0001-02-29 BC
(1 row)
regression=# select '0002-02-28 BC'::date + 1;
?column?
---------------
0002-03-01 BC
(1 row)
So I'd say there are two separate bugs in datetime input processing
exposed here.
> Huh? It seems the calculation for leap dates with negative year values is
> broken. This example was taken from a current HEAD checkout today, the
> original version i've seen this behavior first was 8.2.4.
I see the same behaviors in 7.4.x, so it's a longstanding problem...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-02-25 17:10:41 | Re: Questions about indexes with text_pattern_ops |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-25 16:29:39 | Re: Questions about indexes with text_pattern_ops |