| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: timestamp with/without time zone |
| Date: | 2001-06-19 01:10:35 |
| Message-ID: | 200106190110.f5J1AZL13231@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 3) continue the status quo, with modest relabeling of the current
> capabilities.
>
> Hmm. Any solution will have some confusion, so it really is not clear
> which labeling path is preferable. Maybe even to those who think it is
> clear ;)
>
> SQL9x "timestamp" has no notion of time zones. PostgreSQL "timestamp"
> does. This is likely the reason for the current labeling scheme (at
> least in pgdump). This also lays the groundwork for more seamless
> upgrade paths later when a "time zone free" timestamp type might be
> available.
Very few people know the standards stuff so it seems we should just call
it timestamp and do the best we can. Basically by mentioning "with
timezone" we are making the standards people happy but confusing our
users.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-19 01:11:06 | Re: Re: Various silliness in heap_getnext and related routines |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2001-06-19 00:53:29 | Re: timestamp with/without time zone |