On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 01:51:33AM -0300, Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> > Analysis of the extra complications added by DST's does not add anything,
> > yet, to the point I'm trying to make, regardless the lack of such cases
> in
> > prac
On Sunday 29 November 2009 8:51:33 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
>
> Just sharing some thoughts.
> 1. That current "date" datatype is actually an abstract definition of a
> time range. Since it is not localized (put in any time zone), it defines a
> time range going from 00:00:00 hs to 23:59:59.
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 01:51:33AM -0300, Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> Analysis of the extra complications added by DST's does not add anything,
> yet, to the point I'm trying to make, regardless the lack of such cases in
> practice.
The major problem with timezone support in SQL is that they basical
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On Sunday 29 November 2009 2:38:43 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Adrian Klaver
> wrote:
> > > On Saturday 28 November 2009 3:41:42 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> > > > Hi Adrian, thanks for your answer.
> > >
On Sunday 29 November 2009 2:38:43 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> > On Saturday 28 November 2009 3:41:42 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> > > Hi Adrian, thanks for your answer.
> > >
> > > I see current criteria and all the SQL-standard compliance
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On Saturday 28 November 2009 3:41:42 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> > Hi Adrian, thanks for your answer.
> >
> > I see current criteria and all the SQL-standard compliance policy, but
> > wouldn't it still make sense to be able to store a date
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Eduardo Piombino writes:
>> I see current criteria and all the SQL-standard compliance policy, but
>> wouldn't it still make sense to be able to store a date reference, along
>> with a time zone reference?
>> Wouldn't it be useful, wouldn't it be
timestamptz
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:25 PM, silly wrote:
> Speaking of timestamps, I think it would be convenient to have a
> single-word alias for "timestamp with time zone". This is the date
> type I use almost exclusively and its name is annoyingly big.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:5
Speaking of timestamps, I think it would be convenient to have a
single-word alias for "timestamp with time zone". This is the date
type I use almost exclusively and its name is annoyingly big.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Eduardo Piombino writes:
>> I see current criteri
Eduardo Piombino writes:
> I see current criteria and all the SQL-standard compliance policy, but
> wouldn't it still make sense to be able to store a date reference, along
> with a time zone reference?
> Wouldn't it be useful, wouldn't it be elegant?
It seems pretty ill-defined to me, considerin
On Saturday 28 November 2009 3:41:42 pm Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> Hi Adrian, thanks for your answer.
>
> I see current criteria and all the SQL-standard compliance policy, but
> wouldn't it still make sense to be able to store a date reference, along
> with a time zone reference?
> Wouldn't it be u
Hi Adrian, thanks for your answer.
I see current criteria and all the SQL-standard compliance policy, but
wouldn't it still make sense to be able to store a date reference, along
with a time zone reference?
Wouldn't it be useful, wouldn't it be elegant?
If i just want to store a reference to "Dec
On Saturday 28 November 2009 3:43:02 am Eduardo Piombino wrote:
> Hello list, this is my first msg here. I hope this is the correct place for
> this subject, I couldn't find any more specific list for this.
>
> This thought had been bugging me for some time now and I thought it was
> time to share
13 matches
Mail list logo
