RE: BUG #19367: typos in backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Николай Фадеев
Subject RE: BUG #19367: typos in backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c
Date
Msg-id c88ef496dcbe264fd6c14d1e3162d577@mail.rambler.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #19367: typos in backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c  (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
Hi, everyone. Yes, according to prog file, these functions also have prorettype => timestamptz, so the should return timestamptz.

29.12.2025, 13:37, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
On Mon, 29 Dec 2025 at 15:55, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There are typos in return type of these functions:
> 1) timestamptz_pl_interval_at_zone(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
>     NOW: PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMP(timestamptz_pl_interval_internal(timestamp,
> span, attimezone));
>     SHOULD:
> PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMPTZ(timestamptz_pl_interval_internal(timestamp, span,
> attimezone));
> 2) Datum timestamptz_mi_interval_at_zone(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
>     NOW: PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMP(timestamptz_mi_interval_internal(timestamp,
> span, attimezone));
>     SHOULD:
> PG_RETURN_TIMESTAMPTZ(timestamptz_mi_interval_internal(timestamp, span,
> attimezone));
>
> You’re right — these are just typos, and they don’t affect correctness since both
> ultimately call Int64GetDatum().
> Still, +1 for fixing them for clarity.

The functions timestamptz_pl_interval() and timestamptz_mi_interval() have the
same typos, right?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #19360: Bug Report: Logical Replication initial sync fails with "conflict=update_origin_differs" PG12 toPG18
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #19367: typos in backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c