From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 3 digit year problem |
Date: | 2002-05-03 14:07:29 |
Message-ID: | 3CD299A1.96C42A11@fourpalms.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Is there any rhyme or reason to these ISO format date parsing rules?
Yes. Though adjustments to the rules are possible, so things are not set
in concrete. There *should* be a complete description of the date/time
parsing rules in the User's Guide appendix.
> Why can't someone store the year without having to pad with zeros for years
> between 100 and 999?
To help distinguish between day numbers and years. We used to allow more
variations in the length of a year field, but have tightened it up a bit
over the years.
> What's wrong with 30-1-1 and below? Why does 40 work and not 30?
Because "30" *could* be a day. "40" can only be something intended to be
a year. And input is not enforced to be strictly ISO-compliant, so
"30-1-1" *could* be interpreted multiple ways.
- Thomas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-03 14:11:49 | Re: HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-05-03 13:59:47 | Re: HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports |