From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | fcaldasdesou(at)bloomberg(dot)net |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18445: date_part / extract range for hours do not match documentation |
Date: | 2024-04-23 14:39:53 |
Message-ID: | 3332891.1713883193@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> In https://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/functions-datetime.html
It would be a good idea to look at versions of the documentation
that aren't so many years obsolete. 8.1 has been EOL since 2010.
> We say that EXTRACT() should return a number between 0-23 for hours
What it says now is
The hour field (0-23 in timestamps, unrestricted in intervals)
(This wording is currently only visible at
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/functions-datetime.html#FUNCTIONS-DATETIME-EXTRACT
but it will propagate into the website's copies of still-maintained
branches at our next quarterly updates.)
> The function seems to also return 24 in some cases eg:
> SELECT date_part('hour', cast('24:00:00.00' as time))::int
> Could we update the documentation or modify the function so that it wraps 24
> back to 0 hours?
That edge case for type "time" is deliberate; see the definition
of that type in table 8.9 here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/datatype-datetime.html
I don't really feel a need to clutter the documentation for EXTRACT()
still more by mentioning it there, especially since the current
wording is not wrong, just silent about that detail.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Carl | 2024-04-23 15:02:58 | Error during installation on a 64 bit Windows 10 Korean environment using postgresql-15.6-1-windows-x64.exe |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2024-04-23 12:33:00 | Re: BUG #15954: Unable to alter partitioned table to set logged |