On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:17:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > "dates who's result" should be "dates whose result." > > It's still horrible English :-( A date hasn't got a result, much > less one that includes a daylight savings time adjustment period.
Advertising
Good point. > We should rewrite the entire paragraph. Maybe > > Days that contain a daylight savings time adjustment are not 24 > hours, but typically 23 or 25 hours. This change creates a > conceptual distinction between intervals of "so many days" > and intervals of "so many hours". Adding '1 day' to a timestamp > now gives the same local time on the next day even if a daylight > savings time adjustment occurs between, whereas adding '24 hours' > will give a different local time when this happens. For example: Sounds reasonable. BTW, I don't know what's correct in other countries, but in the US it's officially "daylight saving time" (singular "saving"). http://tf.nist.gov/general/daylightsavingtime.html Not that anybody actually says it that way ;-) -- Michael Fuhr (Who'd be happy to live on UTC and do away with timezones and DST altogether.) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
