SV: to_timestamp function - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Gustavsson Mikael
Subject SV: to_timestamp function
Date
Msg-id 89DE7C43D727C04CA77C8B7AB82533CD023DB858B6@WINVMSERV463.ad.smhi.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: to_timestamp function  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
Thanks for fast reply!

I'll forward the answer to my developers.

kr
Mikael Gustavsson
________________________________________
Från: Tom Lane [tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Skickat: den 20 mars 2019 17:33
Till: Gustavsson Mikael
Kopia: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
Ämne: Re: to_timestamp function

Gustavsson Mikael <mikael.gustavsson@smhi.se> writes:
> So my question is, is it intentional that to_timestamp is stricter than cast to timestamp?

Yes.  The point of using that function at all is to be strict about the
input format, so being strict about the field values seems to make
sense along with that.  An independent argument for it is mentioned in
the commit message (d3cd36a13):

    Historically, something like to_date('2009-06-40','YYYY-MM-DD') would
    return '2009-07-10' because there was no prohibition on out-of-range
    month or day numbers.  This has been widely panned, and it also turns
    out that Oracle throws an error in such cases.  Since these functions
    are nominally Oracle-compatibility features, let's change that.

                        regards, tom lane



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: LDAP on AIX build farm animals
Next
From: "Peter J. Holzer"
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance of ByteA: ascii vs binary