From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
Cc: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Unexpected behaviour of date_part |
Date: | 2009-06-30 14:22:09 |
Message-ID: | 17271.1246371729@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> The <datetime value expression> isn't '2009 ... +11', it's the absolute
> time that string represents. It doesn't in fact have a time-zone
> component except in the context of your locale settings.
> I don't know if we do follow the standard here though - not read it through.
The spec does appear to contemplate that the timezone be represented
separately. We've discussed this in the past but there's not been a lot
of enthusiasm for changing it ... aside from the work involved, it would
mean doubling the space required for a timestamptz value (because of
alignment considerations).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-30 14:26:43 | Re: |
Previous Message | Kaloyan Iliev | 2009-06-30 13:10:02 | Postgresql and punycode(IDN) |