| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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 |