From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Patric Bechtel <patric(dot)bechtel(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: We're not lax enough about maximum time zone offset from UTC |
Date: | 2012-05-30 23:33:40 |
Message-ID: | 13846.1338420820@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> writes:
> On May 30, 2012, at 3:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, as pointed out by Patric, if you dump and restore an old
>> timestamptz value in one of these zones, it will fail to restore because
>> of the sanity check. I think therefore that we'd better enlarge the
>> allowed range to 15:59:59 either way.
> Should you be validating them on a per-time zone basis? Or does it matter?
We can't really --- a given input string should be valid, or not,
independently of what TimeZone is set to. If we change that we're far
too likely to break scenarios that work now.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2012-05-30 23:34:16 | Re: Not quite a security hole: CREATE LANGUAGE for non-superusers |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-05-30 23:33:33 | Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off |