Re: BUG #16419: wrong parsing BC year in to_date() function
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-09-30T22:10:38Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 5:35 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > By that logic, we should never fix any bug in a back branch. No, by that logic, we should not change any behavior in a back-branch upon which a customer is plausibly relying. No one relies on a certain query causing a server crash, for example, or a cache lookup failure, so fixing those things can only help people. But there is no reason at all why someone shouldn't be relying on this very old and long-established behavior not to change in a minor release. One reason they might do that is because there was a discussion about what I believe to this exact same case 4 years ago in which you and I both endorsed the position you are now claiming is so unreasonable that nobody will mind if we change it in a minor release. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAKOSWNmwCH0wx6MApc1A8ww%2B%2BEQmG07AZ3t6w_XjRrV1xeZpTA%40mail.gmail.com So you now think this should be back-patched when previously you didn't even think it was be good enough for master. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Fix handling of BC years in to_date/to_timestamp.
- db96be24ce32 10.15 landed
- c5232dca8d1b 12.5 landed
- b0fe0b022f80 11.10 landed
- 99fd38c02299 13.1 landed
- 489c9c3407cb 14.0 landed
- 4857e6fe16c2 9.5.24 landed
- 19e7982681df 9.6.20 landed
-
Fix make_timestamp[tz] to accept negative years as meaning BC.
- a094c8ff5352 14.0 landed
-
doc: PG 13 relnotes, update TOAST item to mention decompression
- fb544735f114 13.0 cited