From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Trevor Talbot" <quension(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magne Mæhre <Magne(dot)Mahre(at)sun(dot)com>, "Aidan Van Dyk" <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Timezone database changes |
Date: | 2007-10-11 21:52:55 |
Message-ID: | 11891.1192139575@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Trevor Talbot" <quension(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Neither is the birth certificate. The recorded, legal time of the
> birth is the one that was written down. If it doesn't happen to match
> an international notion of current time, that's unfortunate, but it's
> not subject to arbitrary changes later. Even if it does match, it
> still belongs to a specific time zone. That's the key semantic point:
> regurgitating that time as anything other than exactly what it was
> entered as is simply not correct.
I'm not convinced about that. One consideration I think you are failing
to account for is that there is a big difference between past and future
times, at least in terms of what is likely to be the meaning of a
change. The above reasoning might apply to a past time but I think it's
bogus for a future time. If the TZ offset for a future time changes,
it's likely because of a DST law change, and we are in Peter's
what-time-is-the-appointment scenario. A TZ offset for a past time
probably should not change, but if it does, it suggests a retroactive
data correction. Surely you don't intend to prevent people from fixing
bad data?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Trevor Talbot | 2007-10-11 23:27:05 | Re: Timezone database changes |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2007-10-11 21:51:41 | Re: Release notes introductory text |