On 2023-01-27 19:12:08 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote: > I am unsure what is the proper mailing list to discuss an the issue, > this one or pgsql-doc. > > PostgreSQL has a reputation of software with excellent support of time > zones, so some people take recommendation to use "timestamp with time zone" > type excessively literally. I mean the "Don't do this" page in the wiki: > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Don%27t_Do_This#Date.2FTime_storage > > Could you, please, add a case when the timestamptz type should not be used? > UTC timestamps of forthcoming events may change due to an updates of tzdata > if they really scheduled at specific local time. An example: Yes. I could argue that this isn't really a "timestamp", though. The time when the future event will happen isn't fixed yet - it depends on future decisions (e.g. an update to DST rules or even a complete switch to a different time zone). However, few people will be that picky in their terminology. So it's probably a good idea to point out that times which are supposed to be relative to a specific time zone should be stored as local time + time zone, not timestamptz (the time zone can be implicit). hp -- _ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality. |_|_) | | | | | hjp@xxxxxx | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
