| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pietro Pugni <pietro(dot)pugni(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14632: Plus and minus operators inconsistency with leap years and year intervals. |
| Date: | 2017-04-26 23:08:32 |
| Message-ID: | CAL9smLD5ARjoWon=YgJCXKD-Dc9cCPXOhNRQYxu_J-4ivPeuPw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Pietro Pugni <pietro(dot)pugni(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> Expect 1912-02-28 is a correct response. The only reason you think the
> 29th comes into play here is because you remember that the starting point
> was the 29th. The system has no such memory.
>
> And this is logically wrong because it leads to wrong results. I’m aware
> that time intervals are difficult to manage but more exactness is needed
> here: '10 years' must have the same meaning when added to a date and
> subtracted from it, otherwise it leads to wrong results.
>
Your suggestion just moves the wrong results to another use case; see my
response upthread. There is no objectively correct answer here, like you
seem to think.
.m
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-04-26 23:12:30 | Re: Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-04-26 23:05:27 | Re: BUG #14632: Plus and minus operators inconsistency with leap years and year intervals. |