From: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: work in progress: timestamp patch |
Date: | 2005-07-26 10:23:20 |
Message-ID: | 42E60F18.4010807@opencloud.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> On 26-Jul-05, at 1:23 AM, Oliver Jowett wrote:
>
>> I looked at this and the current code is certainly wrong. The timezone
>> offset of a Timestamp (deprecated method!) returns the offset of the
>> JVM's default timezone always. We should indeed be passing the target
>> calendar and using that.
>>
>> I've added that change to my patch. Interestingly none of the regression
>> tests fail with it changed; we're very short on tests that actually test
>> the with-Calendar code..
>
> Well, I actually think this little change is more of the problem than
> anything else.
I don't understand what you mean -- are you saying we shouldn't change this?
> Did you manage to cobble together a patch for me to test ?
I'll send you a current snapshot in an hour or so. I got sidetracked
into trying to work out the semantics of getDate() and getTime() on a
timestamptz, still haven't found an entirely satisfactory solution..
-O
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-07-26 10:42:26 | Re: getObject(<oid>) returns integer instead of LargeObject |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2005-07-26 10:20:17 | Re: work in progress: timestamp patch |