Re: Timestamp weirdness

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, "emergency(dot)shower(at)gmail(dot)com" <emergency(dot)shower(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Timestamp weirdness
Date: 2005-07-25 03:13:08
Message-ID: 18989.1122261188@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> writes:
> On 24-Jul-05, at 7:41 PM, Oliver Jowett wrote:
>> I'm leaning towards using UNKNOWN as the least-bad option for now,

> Seems like this is the only way to go for now. +1 from me.

I haven't got a better idea either. Seems like we should cobble this up
and see how badly it fails, at least ;-)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Minal 2005-07-25 06:38:35 Accessing functions from JSP code
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2005-07-25 03:06:23 Re: Timestamp weirdness