On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:33:02PM +0100, Oliver Ford wrote:
> Ok I've made that change in the attached v3. I'm not sure as I'm on
> en_US.UTF-8 locale too. Maybe something Windows specific?

This patch applies against master (8485a25a), compiles, and
passes a make check.

I tested both on my mac laptop, and my linux server.

If we want this patch, I'd say it's ready for committer.  We may want
(and I can't believe I'm saying this) more discussion as to exactly what
the strategy for to_number() (and friends) is.  Do we want to duplicate
Oracle's functionality, or do we want a similar function to do similar
things, without necessarily having a goal of identical behavior to

For myself, I pretty much never use the to_date, to_number, or
to_timestamp functions except when porting oracle code.  I do use the
to_char functions on occasion.  If strftime were available, I probably
wouldn't use them.

I would commit this patch and update the TODO with a goal of making
to_number as Oracle compatible as is reasonable.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to