Re: Patch for SQL-Standard Interval output and decoupling DateStyle from IntervalStyle

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch for SQL-Standard Interval output and decoupling DateStyle from IntervalStyle
Date: 2008-11-08 19:56:23
Message-ID: 4915EEE7.10604@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Oh, I see what you're trying to do. The answer is no. We're not going
> to totally destroy back-portability of dumps, especially not for a
> problem that won't even affect most people (negative intervals are
> hardly common).

Similarly I wonder if pg_dump should add a "fail if version < 8.2" right
before it outputs
SET standard_conforming_strings = on;
which IMHO is far more common than negative intervals and AFAICT
has the same risk.

For intervals, we would only add the fail code if intervalstyle was set
to one of the new interval styles (if the ISO8601 interval's accepted
it'll have the problem too).

For backward compatible patches, they could still have their
GUC settingse specify standard_conforming_strings and interval_style
values that are supported by whichever versions they want to support.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paul Schlie 2008-11-08 20:02:50 Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-11-08 19:47:26 Re: Patch for SQL-Standard Interval output and decoupling DateStyle from IntervalStyle