On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 02:57:59PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andreas Karlsson <andr...@proxel.se> writes: > > On 12/13/24 12:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> What I think we should do about this is to teach timestamp > >> input to look into the current IANA time zone to see if it > >> knows the given abbreviation, and if so use that meaning > >> regardless of what timezone_abbreviations might say. > > > I am not convinced this is an improvement. While this patch removes the > > round-trip hazard it also makes it confusing to use the > > timezone_abbreviations GUC since it can be overridden by IANA data based > > on your current timezone. So you need to know all the, sometimes weird, > > names for your current timezone. Seems unnecessarily hard to reason > > about and wouldn't most people who use timezone_abbreviations rely on > > the current behavior? > > Presumably they're not that weird to the locals? > > I am not sure what you mean by "people who use > timezone_abbreviations". I think that's about everyone --- it's > not like the default setting doesn't contain any abbreviations. > (If it didn't then we'd not have such a problem...) > > > But that said I personally only use ISO timestamps with numerical > > offsets. Partially to avoid all this mess. > > If you only use ISO notation then this doesn't matter to you > either way.
Yes, your patch seems like a big improvement. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
