Re: work in progress: timestamp patch

On 26-Jul-05, at 6:23 AM, Oliver Jowett wrote:

> Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>> On 26-Jul-05, at 1:23 AM, Oliver Jowett wrote:
>>
>>> I looked at this and the current code is certainly wrong. The
>>> timezone
>>> offset of a Timestamp (deprecated method!) returns the offset of the
>>> JVM's default timezone always. We should indeed be passing the
>>> target
>>> calendar and using that.
>>>
>>> I've added that change to my patch. Interestingly none of the
>>> regression
>>> tests fail with it changed; we're very short on tests that
>>> actually test
>>> the with-Calendar code..
>>>
>> Well, I actually think this little change is more of the problem
>> than anything else.
>>
>
> I don't understand what you mean -- are you saying we shouldn't
> change this?
No, I think this may be the bug that causes it to fail currently. Not
that it shouldn't be overhauled. But this one is
probably the most significant "bug"
>
>
>> Did you manage to cobble together a patch for me to test ?
>>
>
> I'll send you a current snapshot in an hour or so. I got
> sidetracked into trying to work out the semantics of getDate() and
> getTime() on a timestamptz, still haven't found an entirely
> satisfactory solution..

OK.
> -O
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>