On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Brendan Jurd" <direvus@gmail.com> writes:
>> I have some thoughts on this and other issues surrounding AM/PM, but
>> perhaps they are better reserved for a separate thread. Might I
>> suggest we apply Alex's bugfix and hold off on the message changes
>> pending further discussion?
>
> Agreed on separating the message issue. What I wanted to know was
> whether there are similar bugs elsewhere in to_timestamp, or whether
> you're pretty sure this is the only occurrence of the coding pattern?
> I've always found it helpful to think "where else did we make this
> same mistake" after identifying a bug.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
I guess we know this already, but for the sake of trying to appear
involved, I've confirmed this fixes the problem as I was seeing it. +1
for the message being a bit more specific, though it's a definite
improvement as is.
- Josh
PS> My apologies for sending this directly to Tom instead of to the
list the first time I sent it.
