Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:47:41PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > I have no idea if this in Oracle or not. But it's something I
> > > needed, an
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 07:14:53PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Which patch is OK? The one attached? You looked like you were making
> changes to this patch in your later emails.
That is the changed/good patch.
Kurt
---(end of broadcast)---
Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:18:08PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > DCH_IW,
> > + DCH_IYYY,
> > + DCH_IYY,
> > + DCH_IY,
> > + DCH_I,
>
> It's better :-) This patch is OK for me.
Which patch is OK? The one attached? You looked like you were making
changes to this pa
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:18:08PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> DCH_IW,
> + DCH_IYYY,
> + DCH_IYY,
> + DCH_IY,
> + DCH_I,
It's better :-) This patch is OK for me.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/
---(end o
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:41:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch allows you to use I as format specifier to get the
> > ISO year, the year correspondeing to the ISO week number (IW).
>
> The purpose of to_char() as I understand it is to be 100%
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:33:44PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> + DCH_I,
^^^
> DCH_,
> DCH_YYY,
> DCH_YY,
There is a bug.. it's wrong position. Please, add the "enum" of
DCH_I to same position as you have "I" in next array. It means
"enum"
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:47:41PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > I have no idea if this in Oracle or not. But it's something I
> > needed, and other people in the past asked about it too.
>
> It is in Oracle, but you aren't exactly on the spot. It should be
>
> IYYY -
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:47:41PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > I have no idea if this in Oracle or not. But it's something I
> > needed, and other people in the past asked about it too.
>
> It is in Oracle, but you aren't exactly on the spot. It should be
>
> IYYY -
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I have no idea if this in Oracle or not. But it's something I
> needed, and other people in the past asked about it too.
It is in Oracle, but you aren't exactly on the spot. It should be
IYYY - 4 digits ('2003')
IYY - 3 digits ('003')
IY - 2 digits ('03')
I- 1 dig
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:41:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch allows you to use I as format specifier to get the
> > ISO year, the year correspondeing to the ISO week number (IW).
>
> The purpose of to_char() as I understand it is to be 100%
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This patch allows you to use I as format specifier to get the
> ISO year, the year correspondeing to the ISO week number (IW).
The purpose of to_char() as I understand it is to be 100% Oracle
compatible, not to invent new features at random. Is this d
This patch allows you to use I as format specifier to get the
ISO year, the year correspondeing to the ISO week number (IW).
Kurt
Index: doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml,
13 matches
Mail list logo
