On Sat, 2014-08-02 at 15:15 +1200, Gavin Flower wrote:
> Since there was no year zero: then it follows that the first decade
> comprises years 1 to 10, and the current Millennium started in 2001 - or
> am I being too logical??? :-)
This is pretty much the reason I'm sending this patch, because
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Gavin Flower
wrote:
> On 02/08/14 12:32, David G Johnston wrote:
>
>>
>> Any supporting arguments for 1-10 = 1st decade other than technical
>> perfection? I guess if you use data around and before 1AD you care about
>> this more, and rightly so, but given sound a
On 02/08/14 12:32, David G Johnston wrote:
Mike Swanson wrote
For a long time (since version 8.0), PostgreSQL has adopted the logical
barriers for centuries and millenniums in these functions. The calendar
starts millennium and century 1 on year 1, directly after 1 BC.
Unfortunately decades are
On 08/01/2014 05:32 PM, David G Johnston wrote:
> Any supporting arguments for 1-10 = 1st decade other than technical
> perfection? I guess if you use data around and before 1AD you care about
> this more, and rightly so, but given sound arguments for both methods the
> one more useful to more use
Mike Swanson wrote
> For a long time (since version 8.0), PostgreSQL has adopted the logical
> barriers for centuries and millenniums in these functions. The calendar
> starts millennium and century 1 on year 1, directly after 1 BC.
> Unfortunately decades are still reported rather simplistically
