Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwY9XtAbSmRA2VZ2eHEZmktT2oDqqMbQKR=fsJfosmWX8w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not  (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not  (Braiam <braiamp@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
Tree view
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:36 AM PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference:      18007
Logged by:          Braiam Peguero
Email address:      braiamp+pg@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 15.3
Operating system:   Debian
Description:       

There's no much difference between timestamp and dateT00:00:00.000, yet
using age(date, date)

There is no "age(date, date)" function.  Only age(timestamp, timestamp)

for some reason internally doesn't type coerce
correctly into the appropriated types.

Nope, type coercion happens before the function call, while figuring out which function signature to choose.
 
I remember that on a previous
versions (not sure if it was 14) this wasn't the case, so I would consider
this a regression.

You haven't provided any code demonstrating what you think is incorrect.

David J.

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: PG Bug reporting form
Date:
Subject: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #18007: age(timestamp, timestamp) is marked as immutable, but using age(date, date) says it's not