You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to issues@calcite.apache.org by "Julian Hyde (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2023/04/01 23:57:00 UTC

[jira] [Resolved] (CALCITE-5538) TimestampString rejects timestamp literals that end with 0 after the period

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5538?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Julian Hyde resolved CALCITE-5538.
----------------------------------
    Fix Version/s: 1.35.0
       Resolution: Fixed

Fixed in [2d0b3acb|https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/2d0b3acb11169b307dc165c1fae8b7c92b888ae9].

> TimestampString rejects timestamp literals that end with 0 after the period
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CALCITE-5538
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5538
>             Project: Calcite
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: core
>    Affects Versions: 1.33.0
>            Reporter: Mihai Budiu
>            Assignee: Julian Hyde
>            Priority: Trivial
>             Fix For: 1.35.0
>
>
> The root cause is that the TimestampString constructor validates a string argument with the following regular expression: ??"[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]{-}[0-9][0-9]{-}[0-9][0-9]"
>           + " "
>           + "[0-9][0-9]:[0-9][0-9]:[0-9][0-9](.[0-9]*[1-9])?"??
> Unfortunately this rejects perfectly legal timestamp strings such as "2023-02-21 10:10:10.000".
> The fix is trivial, if we agree that this is a bug. Is there a deeper reason for this validation?
> There seem to be no unit tests for this TimestampString constructor.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)