Thanks Karel, Good call, you guessed it. I was just using my Oracle knowledge of the to_date and applying it to the results I was expecting in pgsql. Guess I should not make those assumptions....
-----Original Message----- From: Karel Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 2:42 AM To: Tom Lane Cc: Servetar, Jason; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SQL] to_date/to timestamp going to BC On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 05:14:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Can someone tell me if this is a bug with the date functions or am I using > > them incorrectly? > > I get the right thing when I use the right format: > > regression=# select dt, to_timestamp(dt, 'FMMonth dd, yyyy') from test_date; > dt | to_timestamp > ----------------+------------------------ > March 11, 1997 | 1997-03-11 00:00:00-05 > (1 row) > > However, I'd agree that this shows a lack of robustness in to_timestamp; > it's not objecting to data that doesn't match the format. The manual is transparent about this. I can add feauture that will check everythig, but users who knows read manual and use already debugged queries will spend CPU on non-wanted code. Hmm.. I look at Oracle, and it allows parse queries like: SVRMGR> select to_date('March 11, 1997', 'Month dd, yyyy') from dual; TO_DATE(' --------- 11-MAR-97 1 row selected. .. well, I add it to my TODO for 7.3 (I plan rewrite several things in to_* functions). Karel -- Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/ C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz, http://mape.jcu.cz ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]