From: | Haribabu kommi <haribabu(dot)kommi(at)huawei(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: insert throw error when year field len > 4 for timestamptz datatype |
Date: | 2013-09-27 10:42:17 |
Message-ID: | 8977CB36860C5843884E0A18D8747B0372BC6401@szxeml558-mbs.china.huawei.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27 September 2013 15:04 Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>>On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Haribabu kommi <haribabu(dot)kommi(at)huawei(dot)com<mailto:haribabu(dot)kommi(at)huawei(dot)com>> wrote:
>>I feel changing the year value to accept the length (>4) is not simple.
>>So many places the year length crossing more than length 4 is not considered.
>>Search in the code with "yyyy" and correct all related paths.
>Right, changing the year value to accept the length (>4) is not simple because so
>many places the year length crossing plus most of the please having assumption
>that it will be always <4.
>Tried to fix issue more couple of places but I don't feeling like its always going
>to be safe to assume that we covered all path.
>Still looking and wondering if we can do change in any simple place or whether
>we can find any other smarter way to fix the issue.
If the changes are very high to deal all scenarios,
I feel it is better do it only in scenarios where the use cases needs it, until it is not confusing users.
The rest can be documented.
Any other opinions/suggestions welcome.
Regards,
Hari babu.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2013-09-27 10:56:52 | Re: backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch |
Previous Message | Sawada Masahiko | 2013-09-27 09:44:39 | Re: Patch for fail-back without fresh backup |