Github user jtstorck commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2082
+1, LGTM. Verified the three cases in the unit test, and tested with a
negative long. Merging...
---
Github user jtstorck commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2082
Reviewing...
---
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2082
@yjhyjhyjh0 Thank you very much to point that out. As you mentioned, for
timezones ahead of UTC can have negative epoch values time, and we should
support those are valid long values.
Github user yjhyjhyjh0 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2082
Thanks for the detail explanation.
Indeed using local time zone is more reasonable.
Didnât notice the date will be transform into local time zone once with
value format.
Just
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2082
@joewitt The test you marked with '@Ignore' used GMT, but PutSQL and Derby
database (used in unit test) treat date without timezone, i.e. local time. This
caused the assertion error.
