| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Default to TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE? |
| Date: | 2021-08-14 08:03:01 |
| Message-ID: | a8f42a9a-e514-c37d-d979-5b0d42eedb44@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13.08.21 19:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 9:28 AM Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>> The only hope is to eventually change the default, so probably
>>> the best thing is to apply pressure via the SQL Std process.
>
>> Then there is no hope because this makes the situation worse.
>
> Agreed; the points I made upthread are just as valid if the change
> is made in the standard. But I'd be astonished if the SQL committee
> would consider such a change anyway.
AFAIU, our timestamp with time zone type doesn't really do what the SQL
standard specifies anyway, as it doesn't actually record the time zone,
but it's more of a "timestamp with time zone aware formatting". For
SQL, it might make sense to add a (third) time stamp type that behaves
more like that.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-08-14 09:32:04 | Re: Added schema level support for publication. |
| Previous Message | Soumyadeep Chakraborty | 2021-08-14 00:59:21 | Re: Changes to recovery_min_apply_delay are ignored while waiting for delay |