Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC
Date: 1998-04-29 13:59:29
Message-ID: 35473241.A136AA91@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-interfaces
>    "For Postgres v6.3 (and earlier) the default date/time style is
>    "traditional Postgres". In future releases, the default may become
>    ISO-8601, which alleviates date specification ambiguities and Y2K
>    collation problems."
> 
> I vote for changing default date format to ISO-8601 to reflect 
> PostgreSQL documentation and for adherence to Standard SQL92.

I was thinking that if the default format changes it should change at a
major rev (i.e. v7.0) since one might expect interfaces to need updates
at a major rev anyway.

But let me turn around the question, in case no one is bothered by this:

Does anyone think that the default date format _shouldn't_ change to
ISO-8601 for the next release?

(I expect to hear that it shouldn't change, but figured I should confirm
it...).

                      - Tom

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 1998-04-29 14:28:14
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes
Previous:From: Byron NikolaidisDate: 1998-04-29 13:31:25
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 1998-04-29 14:28:14
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes
Previous:From: Peter MountDate: 1998-04-29 13:50:01
Subject: RE: [INTERFACES] jdbc vs. odbc performance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group