15.03.2016 03:21, Vitaly Burovoy:
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?
I was going to set "Ready for Committer", but then I've noticed message
from Mark Dilger and changed my mind.
Now, when you answered him, I have no objections.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
