Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables)

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables)
Date: 2013-03-11 17:48:01
Message-ID: 513E18D1.1060908@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> Having said that, I'd still be inclined to try to set the remote's
> timezone GUC just so that error messages coming back from the remote
> don't reflect a randomly different timezone, which was the basic issue
> in the buildfarm failures we saw yesterday. OTOH, there is no guarantee
> at all that the remote has the same timezone database we do, so it may
> not know the zone or may think it has different DST rules than we think;
> so it's not clear how far we can get with that. Maybe we should just
> set the remote session's timezone to GMT always.

Yeah, that seems the safest choice. What are the potential drawbacks,
if any?

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2013-03-11 17:52:12 Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2013-03-11 17:32:04 Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]