From: | Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Decade indication |
Date: | 2020-01-20 23:11:18 |
Message-ID: | CAMsGm5cSWUuFZ+we-9DPaq91XLZ27rZkxgkEBxmsPSHw+U3ApA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 17:52, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> I assume there is enough agreement that decades start on 20X0 that we
> don't need to document that Postgres does that.
>
I think the inconsistency between years, decades, centuries, and millenia
is worthy of documentation. In fact, it already is for EXTRACT:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-datetime.html#FUNCTIONS-DATETIME-EXTRACT
It describes decade as "The year field divided by 10", whereas for century
and millennium it refers to centuries and millennia beginning in '01 years.
I think if I were designing EXTRACT I would probably have decades follow
the pattern of century and millennium, mostly because if somebody wants
year / 10 they can just write that. But I am, to say the least, not
proposing any modifications to this particular API, for multiple reasons
which I'm sure almost any reader of this list will agree with.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-01-21 00:35:17 | Re: PATCH: standby crashed when replay block which truncated in standby but failed to truncate in master node |
Previous Message | Egor Rogov | 2020-01-20 23:07:17 | Re: BRIN cost estimate breaks geometric indexes |