Re: Possibly misleading documentation of Template Patterns forDate/Time Formatting - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From David Kubecka
Subject Re: Possibly misleading documentation of Template Patterns forDate/Time Formatting
Date
Msg-id CAKtMQEfCug_J85gV5ca-YQBGxYS1DVW2p-LmWUWrAtJ8YV46yg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Possibly misleading documentation of Template Patterns for Date/Time Formatting  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Possibly misleading documentation of Template Patterns for Date/Time Formatting
List pgsql-bugs


pá 17. 4. 2020 v 17:52 odesílatel Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal:
David Kubecka <davidkubecka366@gmail.com> writes:
> on the official docs
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/functions-formatting.html see the table
> 9-24 and Pattern "Q". The doc (for version 9.6) says:

> quarter (ignored by to_date and to_timestamp)

> All the later versions of the doc (10, 11, 12) miss the "ignored" note

It's still there, just further down:

  * In to_timestamp and to_date, weekday names or numbers (DAY, D, and
    related field types) are accepted but are ignored for purposes of
    computing the result. The same is true for quarter (Q) fields.

I think this was changed because we noticed that the docs failed to point
out the issue for weekday fields, and cramming similar annotations into
their already-long table entries didn't make sense.  So the info got moved
to the commentary below.

I see. I wonder if it wouldn't be better e.g. to reference this info from all the ignored fields in the table through an asterisk comment just under the table (thus making the list of unsuppored patterns even more explicit). Just an idea, It's definitely not an easy task to make a good documentation :-)

Anyway, could you shed some light if there's any particular reason why TO_DATE( '2012-4', 'YYYY-Q' ) isn't supported?


                        regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: PG Bug reporting form
Date:
Subject: BUG #16378: Invalid memory access on interrupting CLUSTER after CREATE TEMP TABLE
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Possibly misleading documentation of Template Patterns for Date/Time Formatting