Re: Bug in storing Timestamp

Hi !

I have never had any problems with timestamps, if I remember correct the
resolution gets worse when you get far away from 1900 or so, is it possible
that using year 0001 gives that bad resolution maybe ?

Mikael

----- Original Message -----
From: "Boris Kirzner" <borisk(at)mainsoft(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 2:39 PM
Subject: [JDBC] Bug in storing Timestamp

> Short description :
> Storing java.sql.Timestamp with specified milliseconds value results to
> wrong value stored in db.
>
> System details :
> OS : WindowsXP
> PostgreSQL version : 8.0.1
> Driver version : 8.0 build 310
>
> Detailed description :
> In order to reproduce the bug run the following code.
> Create the table in the db.
> The code creates a timestamp of "0001-01-01 02:02:02.0" and stores it into
> the db.
> The actual value stored is "02:22:42".
>
>
> CREATE TABLE TYPES_EXTENDED (
> id char(10),
> t_time time
> )
> WITHOUT OIDS;
>
> long milliseconds = Timestamp.valueOf("0001-01-01 02:02:02.0").getTime();
> Timestamp javaTimestamp = new Timestamp(milliseconds);
> System.out.println("Timestamp stored : " + javaTimestamp);
> PreparedStatement stmt = connection.prepareStatement("insert into
> types_extended(ID,t_time) values ('aaa',?)");
> stmt.setTimestamp(1, javaTimestamp);
> stmt.execute();
>
>
> Thank you in advance,
>
> --
> Boris Kirzner
> Mainsoft Corporation
> http://www.mainsoft.com
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly