Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ron Mayer
Subject Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec
Date
Msg-id 48CABE6F.6060009@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> writes:
>> ... ISO 8601 intervals ...
> 
> On the output side, seems like a GUC variable
> is the standard precedent here.  I'd still vote against overloading
> DateStyle --- it does too much already --- but a separate variable for
> interval style wouldn't bother me.  In fact, given that we are now
> somewhat SQL-compliant on interval input, a GUC that selected
> PG traditional, SQL-standard, or ISO 8601 interval output format seems
> like it could be a good idea.

Is it OK that this seems to me it wouldn't be backward compatible
with the current interval_out that looks to me to be using
the DateStyle GUC?

I supposed it could be made backward compatible if the new
IntervalStyle GUC defaulted to a value of "guess_from_datestyle",
but I fear an option like that  might add rather than remove
confusion.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: [Review] Tests citext casts by David Wheeler.
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [Review] Tests citext casts by David Wheeler.