Re: Proposal for better support of time-varying timezone abbreviations
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal for better support of time-varying timezone abbreviations |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 11467.1413991961@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal for better support of time-varying timezone abbreviations (Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal for better support of time-varying timezone
abbreviations
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 09:50:16AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> The same thought had occurred to me. Probably the main use of the >> datetime parsing code in ecpg is for interpreting outputs from the >> server, and (at least by default) the server doesn't use timezone >> abbreviations when printing timestamps. So maybe that's largely >> dead code anyhow. I would not propose back-patching such a change, >> but we could try it in 9.5 and see if anyone complains. > Agreed on all accounts. >> A less drastic remedy would be to remove just those abbreviations >> whose meaning has actually changed over time. Eventually that >> might be all of them ... but in the meantime, we could at least >> argue that we weren't breaking any case that worked well before. > This is what your patch did, right? No, I did not touch ecpg's set of tokens at all, just changed the representation of datetktbl to match the new backend coding. I figured we could discuss behavioral changes separately. I don't have a strong opinion about which of the above things to do ... what's your preference? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: