Re: Patch for jdbc ResultSet.getTimestamp()
От | Thomas Lockhart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch for jdbc ResultSet.getTimestamp() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3B036581.120358B8@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch for jdbc ResultSet.getTimestamp() (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch for jdbc ResultSet.getTimestamp()
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
> I certainly will not be applying any jdbc stuff to 7.1.X. I was told > not to apply stuff during beta. I am sure not going to apply anything > to a minor release. OK, but if someone takes responsibility for the accuracy and effectiveness of a patch, then it should be considered for application. We had trouble during beta applying larger patches or patches which were not correct; some of which could be vetted by simple inspection. This one would actually be in the "simple inspection" category, but if someone (a third person) wants to test it first that would be better and that step might be considered essential. Without any patches, we would not have any minor releases so I'm not sure that this is violating any standing rules for branch management ;) Re: the code itself... I see that this section of code assumes that time zones are on an even hour boundary (that is, that there are only two digits in the ISO time zone). That is not true for Canada/Newfoundland and Asia/Calcutta time zones (perhaps others too), which are on half-hour boundaries. Since the code is looking for a sign character exactly three positions away from the end of the timestamp string, it is not likely to catch those cases istm. Anyone want to take a stab at handling both 3 ("-08") and 6 ("-02:30") character time zone fields too? Or am I misreading the code?? - Thomas
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: