Re: BUG #1518: Conversions to (undocumented) SQL year-month

The following bug has been logged online:

Bug reference: 1518
Logged by: Roy Badami
Email address: roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk
PostgreSQL version: 8.0.1
Operating system: Solaris 9
Description: Conversions to (undocumented) SQL year-month and
day-time interval types silently discard data
Details:

Conversions to the (undocumented) SQL year-month and day-time intervals
silently discard data, instead of raising an exception.

Note, the following examples intentinally use non-standard interval syntax,
since SQL standard interval syntax appears to be broken...

radius=# create table foo (year_month interval year to month);
CREATE TABLE
radius=# insert into foo values ('1 year 1 month');
INSERT 19963 1
radius=# select * from foo;
year_month
--------------
1 year 1 mon
(1 row)

-- correct

radius=# insert into foo values ('1 hour 1 minute');
INSERT 19964 1

-- should be an error, I think?

radius=# select * from foo;
year_month
--------------
1 year 1 mon
00:00:00
(2 rows)

-- but instead the interval has been replaced by a zero interval

radius=# create table bar (day_time interval day to second);
CREATE TABLE
radius=# insert into bar values ('1 hour 1 minute');
INSERT 19968 1
radius=# select * from bar;
day_time
----------
01:01:00
(1 row)

-- correct

radius=# insert into bar values ('1 year 1 month');
INSERT 19969 1

-- should be an error, I think?

radius=# select * from bar;
day_time
----------
01:01:00
00:00:00
(2 rows)

-- but instead has been converted to a zero interval

Roy Badami wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 1518
> Logged by: Roy Badami
> Email address: roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk
> PostgreSQL version: 8.0.1
> Operating system: Solaris 9
> Description: Conversions to (undocumented) SQL year-month and
> day-time interval types silently discard data
> Details:

I have finally found time to research your issues:

> Conversions to the (undocumented) SQL year-month and day-time intervals

Yes, I noticed that. Once I outline is behavior we need to revisit
that.

> silently discard data, instead of raising an exception.

Yep, noticed that too.

Looking at your examples, it looks terrible, but after researching it,
it isn't too bad, so let me lay out the information and we can decide
how to handle it.

First, the fundamental issue with intervals is that they are not tied to
a particular date, meaning there is no way to map a specific number of
days to a number of months. (Some days are also 23 or 25 hours but that
variability seems to be considered acceptable.)

This is why the interval data type store both seconds and months.

I ran a few tests using constants, which is clearer:

test=> select (current_timestamp - 'epoch'::timestamp)::interval;
interval
-------------------------------
12860 days 19:24:13.854829073
(1 row)

Notice it shows only days and time, not any years or months because it
doesn't actually know how many years or months.

> Note, the following examples intentinally use non-standard interval syntax,
> since SQL standard interval syntax appears to be broken...
>
> radius=# create table foo (year_month interval year to month);
> CREATE TABLE
> radius=# insert into foo values ('1 year 1 month');
> INSERT 19963 1
> radius=# select * from foo;
> year_month
> --------------
> 1 year 1 mon
> (1 row)
>
> -- correct

Should this be "mon" or "month"?

> radius=# insert into foo values ('1 hour 1 minute');
> INSERT 19964 1
>
> -- should be an error, I think?

The problem is that an interval restriction controls storage, but does
not invalidate input. The only good way to do that is with CHECK and
"date_trunc() != val".

In fact, the query below shows that the time information that is outside
the requested range is not even stored:

test=> select (current_timestamp - 'epoch'::timestamp)::interval year to month::interval;
interval
----------
00:00:00
(1 row)

> radius=# select * from foo;
> year_month
> --------------
> 1 year 1 mon
> 00:00:00
> (2 rows)
>
> -- but instead the interval has been replaced by a zero interval

What is confusing here is that instead of printing nothing, it prints a
zero time. Should it print something different, perhaps "0 mons"?

> radius=# create table bar (day_time interval day to second);
> CREATE TABLE
> radius=# insert into bar values ('1 hour 1 minute');
> INSERT 19968 1
> radius=# select * from bar;
> day_time
> ----------
> 01:01:00
> (1 row)
>
> -- correct
>
> radius=# insert into bar values ('1 year 1 month');
> INSERT 19969 1
>
> -- should be an error, I think?
>
> radius=# select * from bar;
> day_time
> ----------
> 01:01:00
> 00:00:00
> (2 rows)
>
> -- but instead has been converted to a zero interval

Again, the interval is zero so it prints zero time.

Does this help?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

Bruce> First, the fundamental issue with intervals is that they
Bruce> are not tied to a particular date, meaning there is no way
Bruce> to map a specific number of days to a number of months.
Bruce> (Some days are also 23 or 25 hours but that variability
Bruce> seems to be considered acceptable.)

Bruce> This is why the interval data type store both seconds and
Bruce> months.

Indeed. ANSI SQL regards these as two distinct kinds of interval data
types. There are day-time intervals, which store some combination of
days, hours, minutes and seconds, and are broadly equivalent to the
seconds field in PostgreSQL intervals, and there are year-month
intervals, which store some combination of years and months, and are
broadly equivalent to the months field in PostgreSQL intervals.

PostgreSQL instead implements a single hybrid interval data type, that
stores both. This isn't problematic in itself. However, in ANSI SQL
no casts exist between day-time intervals and year-month intervals.
PostgreSQL effectively implements a cast that always returns a zero
interval; it should raise an exception.

Actually, it looks like the underlying problem is more basic than all
this. Here's an example entirely with year-month intervals.

radius=# create table foo (a interval year);
CREATE TABLE
radius=# insert into foo values (interval '1 year 1 month');
INSERT 20947 1
radius=# select * from foo;
a
--------
1 year
(1 row)

I don't have a copy of the spec, but according to "A guide to the SQL
standard" conversions like this that would discard data are supposed
to raise an exception.

Ok, and how about this one, which is far worse:

radius=# create table bar (a interval month);
CREATE TABLE
radius=# insert into bar values (interval '1 year 1 month');
INSERT 20956 1
radius=# select * from bar;
a
-------
1 mon
(1 row)

The ANSI-compliant answer is 13 months, but PostgreSQL returns 1 month!

It seems to me that the ANSI compatible interval stuff should be disabled
by default, since it clearly doesn't work yet :-/

Like the ANSI interval literal issue (bug 1517) this is another
smoking gun for porters...

-roy

Roy> I don't have a copy of the spec, but according to "A guide to
Roy> the SQL standard" conversions like this that would discard
Roy> data are supposed to raise an exception.

Just to clarify, my understanding is that in ANSI SQL it is valid to
convert from the data type INTERVAL YEAR TO MONTH to the data type
INTERVAL YEAR, but the conversion should raise an exception if the
value is not an integral number of years...

-roy

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005, Roy Badami wrote:

> Roy> I don't have a copy of the spec, but according to "A guide to
> Roy> the SQL standard" conversions like this that would discard
> Roy> data are supposed to raise an exception.
>
> Just to clarify, my understanding is that in ANSI SQL it is valid to
> convert from the data type INTERVAL YEAR TO MONTH to the data type
> INTERVAL YEAR, but the conversion should raise an exception if the
> value is not an integral number of years...

Hmm, I'm not entirely sure what the spec says about this. I think the
covering clause in SQL92 is 6.10 (<cast specification>) GR 12d. The error
definition appears to be:

d) If SD is interval and TD and SD have different interval pre-
cisions, then let Q be the least significant <datetime field>
of TD.
i) Let Y be the result of converting SV to a scalar in units Q
according to the natural rules for intervals as defined in the
Gregorian calendar.

ii) Normalize Y to conform to the datetime qualifier "P TO Q"
of TD. If this would result in loss of precision of the
leading datetime field of Y, then an exception condition is
raised: data exception-interval field overflow.

And SQL 99 seems to add a sentence saying "whether to truncate or round in
the least significant field of the result is implementation-defined."

OK, here are the TODO items I have created:

* Add support for ANSI time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1 2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND
* Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1-2' YEAR TO MONTH
* Process mixed ANSI/PG INTERVAL syntax, and round value to requested precision

Interpret INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH as CAST (INTERVAL '1 year' AS INTERVAL
MONTH), and this should return '12 months'

Is this sufficient?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Roy Badami wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 1518
> Logged by: Roy Badami
> Email address: roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk
> PostgreSQL version: 8.0.1
> Operating system: Solaris 9
> Description: Conversions to (undocumented) SQL year-month and
> day-time interval types silently discard data
> Details:
>
> Conversions to the (undocumented) SQL year-month and day-time intervals
> silently discard data, instead of raising an exception.
>
> Note, the following examples intentinally use non-standard interval syntax,
> since SQL standard interval syntax appears to be broken...
>
> radius=# create table foo (year_month interval year to month);
> CREATE TABLE
> radius=# insert into foo values ('1 year 1 month');
> INSERT 19963 1
> radius=# select * from foo;
> year_month
> --------------
> 1 year 1 mon
> (1 row)
>
> -- correct
>
> radius=# insert into foo values ('1 hour 1 minute');
> INSERT 19964 1
>
> -- should be an error, I think?
>
> radius=# select * from foo;
> year_month
> --------------
> 1 year 1 mon
> 00:00:00
> (2 rows)
>
> -- but instead the interval has been replaced by a zero interval
>
> radius=# create table bar (day_time interval day to second);
> CREATE TABLE
> radius=# insert into bar values ('1 hour 1 minute');
> INSERT 19968 1
> radius=# select * from bar;
> day_time
> ----------
> 01:01:00
> (1 row)
>
> -- correct
>
> radius=# insert into bar values ('1 year 1 month');
> INSERT 19969 1
>
> -- should be an error, I think?
>
> radius=# select * from bar;
> day_time
> ----------
> 01:01:00
> 00:00:00
> (2 rows)
>
> -- but instead has been converted to a zero interval
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> OK, here are the TODO items I have created:

> * Add support for ANSI time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1 2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND
> * Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1-2' YEAR TO MONTH

That example might better read, say,

* Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '2005-3' YEAR TO MONTH

regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > OK, here are the TODO items I have created:
>
> > * Add support for ANSI time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1 2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND
> > * Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1-2' YEAR TO MONTH
>
> That example might better read, say,
>
> * Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '2005-3' YEAR TO MONTH

Uh, I thought about that, but we are talking about an interval here, not
a year, so 2005 years seems like a strange number of years to span. I
will change it to 9-7 or something so it doesn't match the line above.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> * Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '2005-3' YEAR TO MONTH

> Uh, I thought about that, but we are talking about an interval here, not
> a year, so 2005 years seems like a strange number of years to span.

Oh, right. Never mind ...

regards, tom lane

>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

Bruce> OK, here are the TODO items I have created:

Bruce> * Add support for ANSI time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1
Bruce> 2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND

Bruce> * Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL
Bruce> syntax, INTERVAL '1-2' YEAR TO MONTH

You may as well use the correct ANSI terminology:

* Add support for ANSI day-time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1
2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND

* Add support for ANSI year-month INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1-2'
YEAR TO MONTH

Bruce> * Process mixed ANSI/PG INTERVAL syntax, and round value
Bruce> to requested precision

Never round, I think. Throwing away precision should be an exception,
unless the discarded fields were zero.

Bruce> Interpret INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH as CAST (INTERVAL '1
Bruce> year' AS INTERVAL MONTH), and this should return '12
Bruce> months'

Bruce> Is this sufficient?

You also need to make EXTRACT do the right thing.

eg EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '1-1' YEAR TO MONTH) => 1

but

EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '13' MONTH) => 13

Ditto for day-time intervals, of course.

I'll have a think about if there's anything else...

-roy

Bruce> Is this sufficient?

Also support for ANSI interval data types is incomplete in the parser,
in that it doesn't recognize the precision field.

eg CREATE TABLE foo (a INTERVAL MONTH(3));

fails to parse.

-roy

Roy Badami wrote:
> >>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> Bruce> OK, here are the TODO items I have created:
>
> Bruce> * Add support for ANSI time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1
> Bruce> 2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND
>
> Bruce> * Add support for ANSI date INTERVAL
> Bruce> syntax, INTERVAL '1-2' YEAR TO MONTH
>
> You may as well use the correct ANSI terminology:
>
> * Add support for ANSI day-time INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1
> 2:03:04' DAY TO SECOND
>
> * Add support for ANSI year-month INTERVAL syntax, INTERVAL '1-2'
> YEAR TO MONTH
>
> Bruce> * Process mixed ANSI/PG INTERVAL syntax, and round value
> Bruce> to requested precision

OK, I added a new ANSI INTERVAL section to the TODO list:

* Add ANSI INTERVAL handling
o Add support for day-time syntax, INTERVAL '1 2:03:04'
DAY TO SECOND
o Add support for year-month syntax, INTERVAL '50-6' YEAR TO MONTH
o Process mixed ANSI/PG syntax, and round value to requested
precision or generate an error
o Interpret INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH as CAST (INTERVAL '1 year' AS
INTERVAL MONTH), and this should return '12 months'
o Interpret INTERVAL '1:30' MINUTE TO SECOND as '1 minute 30 seconds'

> Never round, I think. Throwing away precision should be an exception,
> unless the discarded fields were zero.

Seems that is implentation-dependent so I added "round' or error" to
the TODO item.

> Bruce> Interpret INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH as CAST (INTERVAL '1
> Bruce> year' AS INTERVAL MONTH), and this should return '12
> Bruce> months'
>
> Bruce> Is this sufficient?
>
> You also need to make EXTRACT do the right thing.
>
> eg EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '1-1' YEAR TO MONTH) => 1
>
> but
>
> EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '13' MONTH) => 13
>
> Ditto for day-time intervals, of course.

Uh, I think this already works fine for PG syntax, and I assume once we
support ANSI syntax it will work fine too:

test=> select EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '1 year 2 month' YEAR TO
MONTH);
date_part
-----------
2
(1 row)

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Roy Badami wrote:
>
> Bruce> Is this sufficient?
>
> Also support for ANSI interval data types is incomplete in the parser,
> in that it doesn't recognize the precision field.
>
> eg CREATE TABLE foo (a INTERVAL MONTH(3));
>
> fails to parse.

Added to TODO:

o Support precision, CREATE TABLE foo (a INTERVAL MONTH(3))

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce> Seems that is implentation-dependent so I added "round' or
Bruce> error" to the TODO item.

Ah, OK. "A guide to the SQL standard" claims it's an exception, but I
haven't checked the actual standard.

Bruce> Uh, I think this already works fine for PG syntax, and I
Bruce> assume once we support ANSI syntax it will work fine too:

I guess. It's just that it's something that EXTRACT doesn't currently
have to worry about, so it would be easy to overlook.

-roy

Roy Badami wrote:
> Bruce> Seems that is implentation-dependent so I added "round' or
> Bruce> error" to the TODO item.
>
> Ah, OK. "A guide to the SQL standard" claims it's an exception, but I
> haven't checked the actual standard.

Here is an email stating it is implementation defined:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-03/msg00162.php

> Bruce> Uh, I think this already works fine for PG syntax, and I
> Bruce> assume once we support ANSI syntax it will work fine too:
>
> I guess. It's just that it's something that EXTRACT doesn't currently
> have to worry about, so it would be easy to overlook.

I don't see how the new code would break EXTACT. I don't think we are
going to have to change any internal representations.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce> Here is an email stating it is implementation defined:

Bruce> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-03/msg00162.php

Hmm, looks like I'm mistaken, then. In fact the "whether to truncate
or round" bit suggests you should do one or the other, rather than
raise an exception.

Will have to take a look at the spec when I get a moment...

-roy

Roy Badami wrote:
> Bruce> Here is an email stating it is implementation defined:
>
> Bruce> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-03/msg00162.php
>
> Hmm, looks like I'm mistaken, then. In fact the "whether to truncate
> or round" bit suggests you should do one or the other, rather than
> raise an exception.
>
> Will have to take a look at the spec when I get a moment...

OK, TODO updated:

o Round or truncate values to the requested precision, e.g.
INTERVAL '11 months' AS YEAR should return one or zero

The full TODO section is:

* Add ANSI INTERVAL handling
o Add support for day-time syntax, INTERVAL '1 2:03:04'
DAY TO SECOND
o Add support for year-month syntax, INTERVAL '50-6' YEAR TO MONTH
o Interpret syntax that isn't uniquely ANSI or PG, like '1:30' or
'1' as ANSI syntax, e.g. interpret '1:30' MINUTE TO SECOND as
'1 minute 30 seconds'
o Interpret INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH as CAST (INTERVAL '1 year' AS
INTERVAL MONTH), and this should return '12 months'
o Round or truncate values to the requested precision, e.g.
INTERVAL '11 months' AS YEAR should return one or zero
o Support precision, CREATE TABLE foo (a INTERVAL MONTH(3))

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> ... I don't think we are
> going to have to change any internal representations.

In order to support the spec *exactly*, we would have to. For instance
we cannot presently tell the difference between '13 months' and '1 year
1 month' ... they both end up stored as '13 months'. I can't say that
I find this very important, but it does put limits on how exactly we can
emulate the spec.

Note that I don't find "emulate the spec exactly" to be a desirable goal
anyway; its failure to consider daylight-savings issues is an
unacceptable shortcoming. The one internal representation change I
would really like to see is to store days separately from months and
seconds, so that we can distinguish '24 hours' from '1 day' (the latter
should sometimes be equivalent to 23 or 25 hours).

regards, tom lane

Bruce> o Interpret INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH as

I'm still not convinced that allowing this doesn't just create
unnecessary confusion. How about:

o Decide whether constructs such as INTERVAL '1 year' MONTH should
be allowed, and if so what they should mean, eg perhaps CAST
(INTERVAL '1 year' AS INTERVAL MONTH)

Tom> In order to support the spec *exactly*, we would have to.
Tom> For instance we cannot presently tell the difference between
Tom> '13 months' and '1 year 1 month' ... they both end up stored
Tom> as '13 months'. I can't say that I find this very important,
Tom> but it does put limits on how exactly we can emulate the
Tom> spec.

Which is where my comment about EXTRACT comes in. They can both be
stored as 13 months, but EXTRACT (MONTH FROM ...) should return 1
month or 13 months as appropriate. Surely this isn't a problem, you
know the type of the interval?

So you _can_ emulate the spec, you just don't use the same internal
representation that a naive implementation of the spec would...

-roy

Roy Badami wrote:
>
> Tom> In order to support the spec *exactly*, we would have to.
> Tom> For instance we cannot presently tell the difference between
> Tom> '13 months' and '1 year 1 month' ... they both end up stored
> Tom> as '13 months'. I can't say that I find this very important,
> Tom> but it does put limits on how exactly we can emulate the
> Tom> spec.
>
> Which is where my comment about EXTRACT comes in. They can both be
> stored as 13 months, but EXTRACT (MONTH FROM ...) should return 1
> month or 13 months as appropriate. Surely this isn't a problem, you
> know the type of the interval?
>

What happens if you store '13 months' into an interval column that is
YEAR TO MONTH? Does extract MONTH return 1 or 13?

Right now we return one:

test=> select extract(month from interval '13 months' year to month);
date_part
-----------
1
(1 row)

but this seems strange:

test=> select extract(month from interval '13 months' month);
date_part
-----------
1
(1 row)

It is because it is really '1 year 1 month':

test=> select interval '13 months' as month;
month
--------------
1 year 1 mon
(1 row)

What I would really like to avoid is having a different internal
representation for ANSI and PG interval values.

The lack of complaints all these years perhaps means people either don't
care or accept the PG behavior.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Which is where my comment about EXTRACT comes in. They can both be
> stored as 13 months, but EXTRACT (MONTH FROM ...) should return 1
> month or 13 months as appropriate. Surely this isn't a problem, you
> know the type of the interval?

EXTRACT doesn't have access to the typmod of its input, in general.
We associate typmods with stored columns but not with the results
of arbitrary expressions.

regards, tom lane

Bruce> What happens if you store '13 months' into an interval
Bruce> column that is YEAR TO MONTH? Does extract MONTH return 1
Bruce> or 13?

In standard SQL the MONTH field of INTERVAL YEAR TO MONTH can't
contain a value greater than 11. Though I don't immediately see how
you'd go about storing 13 in the month field. I don't think there's
an analogue of EXTRACT that allows you to set fields, is there?

Bruce> The lack of complaints all these years perhaps means people
Bruce> either don't care or accept the PG behavior.

To be honest, I don't really care :-)

I try to write my SQL in as standard a way as possible, in case I
later want to port to another database...

I would be perfectly happy for

INTERVAL '1' MONTH

to be a syntax error. I just don't like the fact that it gives me a
zero interval.

Taking out the ISO support from the parser is a valid fix as far as
I'm concerned (though actually making it do the ISO thing would
obviously be nicer)

-roy

>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

>> You also need to make EXTRACT do the right thing.
>>
>> eg EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '1-1' YEAR TO MONTH) => 1
>>
>> but
>>
>> EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '13' MONTH) => 13
>>
>> Ditto for day-time intervals, of course.

Bruce> Uh, I think this already works fine for PG syntax, and I
Bruce> assume once we support ANSI syntax it will work fine too:

Ok, so based on Tom's comments it sounds like this isn't a non-issue;
in fact it sounds like it will be very hard to make this work (at
least without changing the internal represnation of an interval).

So perhaps there should be something on the TODO list, even if only:

o figure out whether it is feasible to make EXTRACT obey ISO
standard semantics.

Roy Badami wrote:
> >>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> >> You also need to make EXTRACT do the right thing.
> >>
> >> eg EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '1-1' YEAR TO MONTH) => 1
> >>
> >> but
> >>
> >> EXTRACT (MONTH FROM INTERVAL '13' MONTH) => 13
> >>
> >> Ditto for day-time intervals, of course.
>
> Bruce> Uh, I think this already works fine for PG syntax, and I
> Bruce> assume once we support ANSI syntax it will work fine too:
>
> Ok, so based on Tom's comments it sounds like this isn't a non-issue;
> in fact it sounds like it will be very hard to make this work (at
> least without changing the internal represnation of an interval).
>
> So perhaps there should be something on the TODO list, even if only:
>
> o figure out whether it is feasible to make EXTRACT obey ISO
> standard semantics.

I am thinking it isn't worth following the spec in this case.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073