Re:Re: Re: Re: Re:Re: [BUGS] Re: [BUGS] Return value error of‘to_timestamp’
myzhen <zhenmingyang@yeah.net>
From: 甄明洋 <zhenmingyang@yeah.net>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Francisco Olarte" <folarte@peoplecall.com>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, "Aleksander Alekseev" <a.alekseev@postgrespro.ru>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-08-19T03:18:37Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
thanks for you answer thanks ! 在 2016-08-18 22:09:06,"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> 写道: >Francisco Olarte <folarte@peoplecall.com> writes: >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:57 AM, 甄明洋 <zhenmingyang@yeah.net> wrote: >>> Why don't use a unified time zone Convention ? > >> Given Tom said: >>>> Aren't standards fun? > >> I suspect SQL std. mandates it. > >The SQL standard does mandate use of ISO convention for timestamp values. >However, the use of any sort of timezone name in "SET timezone" is outside >the SQL standard (or at least it was last I looked). Our timezone name >support is based on the IANA (nee Olson) timezone data set, which is used >by just about everybody except Microsoft, and that follows the POSIX >standard. > >In principle we could hack up the IANA code and data so that zone names >that look like POSIX names follow the ISO sign convention, but if you >ask me that's just nuts. It would mean for example that "set timezone >to 'PST8PDT'" inside PG would act completely differently from "TZ=PST8PDT" >in the shell. That would result in more confusion not less. > >In short, neither of these choices were made in a vacuum. > > regards, tom lane