Re: Strange behavior with leap dates and centuries BC

--On Montag, Februar 25, 2008 14:04:18 -0500 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
wrote:

> The other issue is whether to throw error for year zero, rather than
> silently interpreting it as 1 BC. I can't recall whether that behavior
> was intentional at the time, but given our current rather strict
> interpretation of date validity checking, it hardly seems like a good
> idea now. What I suggest is that we throw error in 8.4 and beyond,
> but not back-patch that change, so as to avoid introducing a behavioral
> change in minor releases.

That sounds reasonable. I'm still trying to find out how it was managed to
get such a date into the database, since it seems not to be intended
behavior by the client. Maybe it's an errorneous to_date() formatting.

--
Thanks

Bernd