Re: small bug in op + between datetime and integer - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Gaetano Mendola
Subject Re: small bug in op + between datetime and integer
Date
Msg-id 022101c36498$095c8210$10d4a8c0@mm.eutelsat.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: small bug in op + between datetime and integer  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> There's a date + integer operator, but no integer + date operator.
> >> Yawn...
>
> > Uh, "Yawn" means we don't need to fix it, or "oh, here's another one"?
>
> It means "I can't get excited about it."  The docs don't claim that we
> have such an operator (do they?) and I see no clear advantage to adding
> one.

Well, I think that have the operator integer + date  is not necessary but is
better to have just to forget that not exist each time that someone wrote an
expression involving integer and date.


Regards
Gaetano Mendola

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Dennis Björklund
Date:
Subject: Re: small bug in op + between datetime and integer
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: DBD::Pg 'lo_read' fails on >= 32768 byte large objects