-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 605
Redshift interval literals seem to fail to parse #177
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
This was intentional limitation of the initial implementation and there's a note to that effect in parser.rs. I don't see a reason why we can't change the parser to accept (I'm curious how Redshift parses |
I'd be happy to take a look at this, @nickolay. |
@maxcountryman That's great to hear! And I will be happy to merge a PR from you:) |
This patch updates our INTERVAL implementation such that the Postgres and Redshfit variation of the syntax is supported: namely that leading field is optional. Fixes apache#177.
This patch updates our INTERVAL implementation such that the Postgres and Redshfit variation of the syntax is supported: namely that leading field is optional. Fixes apache#177.
Alter INTERVAL to support postgres syntax This patch updates our INTERVAL implementation such that the Postgres and Redshfit variation of the syntax is supported: namely that 'leading field' is optional. Fixes #177.
Redshift's interval literals seem to differ in structure from what the parser presently expects. Notably, the date/time field is part of the preceding string. Perhaps the interval implementation could be modified to consider the Redshift implementation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: