Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Brendan Jurd wrote: >> The changes to the documentation all look good. I did notice one >> final typo that I think was introduced in the latest version. >> doc/src/sgml/datatype.sgml:2270 has "Nonstandardrd" instead of >> "Nonstandard".
> Just checked in a fix to that one; and updated my website at > http://0ape.com/postgres_interval_patches/ > and pushed it to my (hopefully fixed now) git server. > If this'll be the final update to this patch should I be > posting it to the mailing list too for the archives? Since it's only one line different from your previous, probably no need. I've started reviewing this patch for commit, and I find myself a bit disturbed by its compatibility properties. The SQL_STANDARD output style is simply ambiguous: what is meant by -1 1:00:00 ? What you get from that will depend on the intervalstyle setting at the recipient. Either of the traditional Postgres styles are non-ambiguous and will be interpreted correctly regardless of receiver's intervalstyle --- in particular, Postgres mode always puts an explicit sign on the time part if the days or months part was negative. What this means is that SQL_STANDARD mode is unsafe for dumping data, and *pg_dump had better force Postgres mode*. We can certainly do that with a couple more lines added to the patch, but it's a bit troublesome that we are boxed into using a nonstandard dump-data format until forever. I don't immediately see any way around that, though. Anyone have a bright idea? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
