Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> I'm inclined to say that these two cases are out of line with what
>> the rest of the code does and we should change them.
> ...
> Now, all three of these cases throw "invalid input syntax" in 8.3,
> so this is not a regression from released behavior. The question
> is does anyone think that these syntaxes should be valid? They're
> not legal per spec, for sure, and they seem pretty ambiguous to me.
Seems to do a sane thing for all sane inputs I threw at it.
It still accepts one odd input that 8.3 rejected:
regression=# select interval '1 1' hour;
Perhaps the additional patch below fixes that?
***************
*** 3022,3028 **** DecodeInterval(char **field, int *ftype, int nf, int range,
tm->tm_hour += val;
AdjustFractSeconds(fval, tm, fsec, SECS_PER_HOUR);
tmask = DTK_M(HOUR);
! type = DTK_DAY; /* set for next field */
break;
case DTK_DAY:
--- 3022,3029 ----
tm->tm_hour += val;
AdjustFractSeconds(fval, tm, fsec, SECS_PER_HOUR);
tmask = DTK_M(HOUR);
! if (range == (INTERVAL_MASK(DAY) | INTERVAL_MASK(HOUR)))
! type = DTK_DAY; /* set for next field */
break;
case DTK_DAY:
It also gives different answers than 8.3 for "select interval '1 1:' hour"
but I guess that's intended, right?
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
