Re: Possible old and fixed bug in Postgres?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name>
Cc: Steve Rogerson <steve(dot)git(at)woodsideendurance(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-general list <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Possible old and fixed bug in Postgres?
Date: 2023-04-05 14:16:56
Message-ID: [email protected]
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name> writes:
>> On 05/04/2023 11:18 CEST Steve Rogerson <steve(dot)git(at)woodsideendurance(dot)co(dot)uk> wrote:
>>     # For very early and late dates, PostgreSQL always returns times in
>>     # UTC and does not tell us that it did so.
>> Early is before 1901-12-14 and late after 2038-01-18
>> ...
>> These seemed correct to me. I'm guessing this might have been a bug/feature of
>> pg in the long ago.

> Judging by the commit message and changed test cases, probably:

> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=921d749bd4c34c3349f1c254d5faa2f1cec03911

I think this was not fixed in full until 2008:

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=0171e72d4da2da7974ff13c63130e2175cebee88

Either way, though, whatever Steve is looking at is far past its
sell-by date.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-04-05 14:24:45 Re: PgOutput Replication Message Format - Differentiate between explicit NULL and Omitted Columns during Insert
Previous Message Erik Wienhold 2023-04-05 10:23:18 Re: Possible old and fixed bug in Postgres?