On 3/14/16, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > 14.03.2016 16:23, David Steele: >> On 2/25/16 4:44 PM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: >> >>> Added to the commitfest 2016-03. >>> >>> [CF] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/540/ >> >> This looks like a fairly straight-forward bug fix (the size of the >> patch is deceptive because there a lot of new tests included). It >> applies cleanly. >> >> Anastasia, I see you have signed up to review. Do you have an idea >> when you will get the chance to do that? >> >> Thanks, > > I've read the patch thoroughly and haven't found any problems. I think > that the patch is in a very good shape. > It fixes a bug and has an excellent set of tests. > > There is an issue, mentioned in the thread above: > >>postgres=# select >>postgres-# to_char(date_trunc('week', '4713-01-01 BC'::date),'day') >>postgres-# ,to_char(date_trunc('week', '4714-12-29 BC'::date),'day') >>postgres-# ,to_char(date_trunc('week', '4714-12-28 BC'::date),'day'); >> to_char | to_char | to_char >>-----------+-----------+----------- >> monday | monday | thursday >>(1 row) > >>since 4714-12-28 BC and to the past detection when a week is starting >>is broken (because it is boundary of isoyears -4713 and -4712). >>Is it worth to break undocumented range or leave it as is? > > But I suppose that behavior of undocumented dates is not essential.
I'm sorry... What should I do with "Waiting on Author" state if you don't have complaints? > -- > Anastasia Lubennikova > Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com > The Russian Postgres Company -- Best regards, Vitaly Burovoy -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
