From: | "Chad Wagner" <chad(dot)wagner(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Ron Johnson" <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PG not rejecting bad dates (was Re: Finding bogus dates) |
Date: | 2007-01-19 00:02:39 |
Message-ID: | 81961ff50701181602x38485537x5c90fdf2125bd1f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 1/18/07, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> wrote:
>
> > Right. In my case I have bad data from a source I didn't control,
> exported
> > via code that I do control which happens to output YYYY-MM-DD. Well,
> except
> > that I don't do what I need to when MM or DD are more than 2 digits, but
> I'm
> > going back to look at that again ;-)
>
> Why didn't the PG engine reject these bad-date records at INSERT
> time. This smacks of something that MySQL would do...
>
The original poster mentioned that the data type that the "date" was stored
in was a varchar, not really much it can do there if don't use the right
data type :(.
Not to mention how misleading it probably is to use a varchar for a data to
the optimizer for calculating selectivity.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2007-01-19 00:05:37 | Re: PG not rejecting bad dates (was Re: Finding bogus dates) |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2007-01-19 00:01:28 | Re: Spam from EnterpriseDB? |