Thread: BUG #17924: Inverted behavior of "Date" and "Reverse Date" when searching a mailbox archive
BUG #17924: Inverted behavior of "Date" and "Reverse Date" when searching a mailbox archive
From
PG Bug reporting form
Date:
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 17924 Logged by: Hans Buschmann Email address: buschmann@nidsa.net PostgreSQL version: Unsupported/Unknown Operating system: Postgres Website Mailing List search Description: I recently did a search on pgsql-hackers. When changing the order of the result set from "Rank" to "Reverse Date" I observed that "Date" gives the results from newest to oldest while "Reverse Date" gives them from oldest to newest. This seems to me a mismatch and quite confusing. The semantics of Date and Reverse Date should be corrected (exchanged) Any thoughts? Hans Buschmann
Re: BUG #17924: Inverted behavior of "Date" and "Reverse Date" when searching a mailbox archive
From
Tom Lane
Date:
PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> When changing the order of the result set from "Rank" to "Reverse Date" I
> observed that "Date" gives the results from newest to oldest while "Reverse
> Date" gives them from oldest to newest.
> This seems to me a mismatch and quite confusing.
> The semantics of Date and Reverse Date should be corrected (exchanged)
It's been like that for a decade or two, and you are the first to
complain AFAIR. Changing it at this point would doubtless add a
lot more confusion than it subtracts.
We could perhaps change to some other terms entirely, like
"Newest First" and "Oldest First", but I'm not convinced that
that's an improvement either.
regards, tom lane
AW: BUG #17924: Inverted behavior of "Date" and "Reverse Date" when searching a mailbox archive
From
Hans Buschmann
Date:
Hello Tom,
I don't mind the exact wording, but it should be semantically correct.
Order by date is ascending (as in SQL).
I would propose to change the wording, perhaps like Newest to oldest (or your suggestion) and make sure, that the selected order shows up in the results.
It is only part of the WebSite, so I don't fear any automation difficulties.
Hans Buschmann
Von: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Mai 2023 16:05
An: Hans Buschmann
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Betreff: Re: BUG #17924: Inverted behavior of "Date" and "Reverse Date" when searching a mailbox archive
Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Mai 2023 16:05
An: Hans Buschmann
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Betreff: Re: BUG #17924: Inverted behavior of "Date" and "Reverse Date" when searching a mailbox archive
PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> When changing the order of the result set from "Rank" to "Reverse Date" I
> observed that "Date" gives the results from newest to oldest while "Reverse
> Date" gives them from oldest to newest.
> This seems to me a mismatch and quite confusing.
> The semantics of Date and Reverse Date should be corrected (exchanged)
It's been like that for a decade or two, and you are the first to
complain AFAIR. Changing it at this point would doubtless add a
lot more confusion than it subtracts.
We could perhaps change to some other terms entirely, like
"Newest First" and "Oldest First", but I'm not convinced that
that's an improvement either.
regards, tom lane
> When changing the order of the result set from "Rank" to "Reverse Date" I
> observed that "Date" gives the results from newest to oldest while "Reverse
> Date" gives them from oldest to newest.
> This seems to me a mismatch and quite confusing.
> The semantics of Date and Reverse Date should be corrected (exchanged)
It's been like that for a decade or two, and you are the first to
complain AFAIR. Changing it at this point would doubtless add a
lot more confusion than it subtracts.
We could perhaps change to some other terms entirely, like
"Newest First" and "Oldest First", but I'm not convinced that
that's an improvement either.
regards, tom lane