Amit Kapila <amit.kap...@huawei.com> writes: > Yes, this is right that tmask need not be changed, also one more thing I > have noticed that > in file Interval.c also there is a function DecodeInterval() which is > currently little different > from DecodeInterval() in datetime.c for DTK_TZ case. > For example Assert check is commented. > Why the Assert check is commented out there?
Assert doesn't work in client-side code. More generally, nobody is maintaining ecpg's copy of the datetime code, and that's been true for a very long time. I'm not personally interested in trying to re-sync that copy. It would be more useful to figure out a way to get rid of it. There have been past discussions of how we could make a single copy of the code work in both backend and frontend contexts, but the frontend environment is so impoverished by comparison (no Assert, no elog, no palloc) that it hasn't looked like an attractive idea. It's also fairly unclear whether anyone is actually using ecpg's client-side datetime support, which means there's little motivation to put a lot of work into it. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers