Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-1325-c1785443565@github.com>
From: "guizmaii (@guizmaii)" <noreply+guizmaii@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:17:01 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] issue #1325: Additional jsr 310 support
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-1325@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-1325@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: guizmaii
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 1785443565
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Edited-At: 2023-10-30T15:19:07Z
X-GitHub-Issue: 1325
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/1325#issuecomment-1785443565
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Hi everyone,

Is there any plan to get official support for `java.time.Instant`?

Based, on the discussion above, it seems that there's a consensus over mapping it to a `TIMESTAMP WITH TIMEZONE`.

Re-using the `java.time.OffsetDateTime` encoder/code (I don't know the internal of this lib) seems to be appropriate, passing it the `Instant` value by converting it to an `OffsetDateTime` with `OffsetDateTime.ofInstant(instantInstance, ZoneOffset.UTC)`, no?

Is there anything preventing/blocking such support from being integrated into this driver?