Re: Why data of timestamptz does not store value of timezone passed to it?

On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Greg Stark [via PostgreSQL] <
ml-node+s1045698n5816903h17(at)n5(dot)nabble(dot)com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Kevin Grittner <[hidden email]
> <http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5816903&i=0>> wrote:
> > It was actually rather disappointing to hear that we had a
> > conforming implementation and changed away from it circa the 7.2
> > release; and even more disturbing to hear that decision is still
> > being defended on the grounds that there's no point providing
> > standard conforming behavior if we can think of different behavior
> > that we feel is more useful. We should have both.
>
> I don't think the behaviour was standards-compliant in 7.2 either. For
> that matter, I can't think of any circumstance where the standard
> behaviour is useful. There's absolutely no way to write correct code
> using it.
>
>
>
​And forcing people to change their data types to migrate to PostgreSQL is
undesirable IF our type is usefully equivalent to others in the majority of
situations - though I don't know if that is actually the case.​

David J.

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Why-data-of-timestamptz-does-not-store-value-of-timezone-passed-to-it-tp5816703p5816906.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.