I think you are right about this. When people look up a
timezone, what we see is the offset to UTC.
UTC + (offset) should equal current time.
We should be consistent. And since the timestamp with
timezone is relatively recent, maybe it will not be so painful
to change the behaviour of extra
On 3 Jul 2003 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> Comments?
The message headers for this email contained:
Received: from www.postgresql.com (www.postgresql.com
[64.117.225.209])
by m20.unixathome.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77EC27A69
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 15:33:13 -0
On 4 Jul 2003 at 23:22, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Dan Langille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Now that my NZ server is up and running:
> > template1=# select now();
> > 2003-07-05 12:47:15.444535+12
>
> > That doesn't look backwards to me.
>
> Try EXTRACT(timezone_hour from now());
>
> The timestam
"Dan Langille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now that my NZ server is up and running:
> template1=# select now();
> 2003-07-05 12:47:15.444535+12
> That doesn't look backwards to me.
Try EXTRACT(timezone_hour from now());
The timestamp I/O routines are using what I think is the correct sign.
EX
On 3 Jul 2003 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> Comments?
Now that my NZ server is up and running:
template1=# select now();
now
---
2003-07-05 12:47:15.444535+12
That doesn't look backwards to me. Perhaps I don't understand the
problem. After rereading y
