Re: BUG #18034: Accept the spelling "+infinity" in datetime input is not accurate - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: BUG #18034: Accept the spelling "+infinity" in datetime input is not accurate
Date
Msg-id ZNTJP9Y6fIoJCJ8f@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #18034: Accept the spelling "+infinity" in datetime input is not accurate  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re:Re: BUG #18034: Accept the spelling "+infinity" in datetime input is not accurate  ("yanliang lei" <msdnchina@163.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Wed, Aug  9, 2023 at 10:53:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > We call our timestamp type datetime in some cases, e.g.:
> > ...
> > I see it in a few other places.  Should we rename it other places too? 
> > I thought datetime was just a short-hand for our date-time types.
> 
> I don't see much reason to change anything here.  "Datetime" is not
> a perfectly strict classification, eg it might or might not include
> "interval" depending on context, and I don't want to try to make
> that exact.
> 
> A more specific release note entry could be "Accept the spelling
> '+infinity' for datetime types that accept infinity"; but I'm not
> sure it's worth the extra verbiage.

Yeah, that was my analysis too.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Only you can decide what is important to you.



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17928: Standby fails to decode WAL on termination of primary
Next
From: PG Bug reporting form
Date:
Subject: BUG #18053: fastpath count per pid in pg_locks shows > 16 entries