From 06edce4c3ffd71271d7beb6717bb133728571c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tom Lane
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:32:34 +0000
Subject: Tighten up to_date/to_timestamp so that they are more likely to
 reject erroneous input, rather than silently producing bizarre results as
 formerly happened.

Brendan Jurd
---
 doc/src/sgml/func.sgml | 9 +++++++--
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

(limited to 'doc/src')

diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
index cb4e6f991b1..05f0aabddd0 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-<!-- $PostgreSQL: pgsql/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml,v 1.446 2008/09/08 00:47:40 tgl Exp $ -->
+<!-- $PostgreSQL: pgsql/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml,v 1.447 2008/09/11 17:32:33 tgl Exp $ -->
 
  <chapter id="functions">
   <title>Functions and Operators</title>
@@ -5187,7 +5187,12 @@ SELECT SUBSTRING('XY1234Z', 'Y*?([0-9]{1,3})');
        </itemizedlist>
       </para>
       <para>
-       Attempting to construct a date using a mixture of ISO week and Gregorian date fields is nonsensical, and could yield unexpected results.  In the context of an ISO year, the concept of a 'month' or 'day of month' has no meaning.  In the context of a Gregorian year, the ISO week has no meaning.  Users should take care to keep Gregorian and ISO date specifications separate.
+       Attempting to construct a date using a mixture of ISO week and
+       Gregorian date fields is nonsensical, and will cause an error.  In the
+       context of an ISO year, the concept of a <quote>month</> or <quote>day
+       of month</> has no meaning.  In the context of a Gregorian year, the
+       ISO week has no meaning.  Users should take care to keep Gregorian and
+       ISO date specifications separate.
       </para>
      </listitem>
 
-- 
cgit v1.2.3