Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-1325-c1786653432@github.com>
From: "guizmaii (@guizmaii)" <noreply+guizmaii@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 07:38:29 +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: 1786653432
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Edited-At: 2023-10-31T07:39:20Z
X-GitHub-Issue: 1325
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/1325#issuecomment-1786653432
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

@davecramer This PR seems to be a bit different from what I'm talking about. It seems to be modifying the default mapping between `java.sql.Timestamp` and the DB, moving it from `TIMESTAMP` to `TIMESTAMPZ` if some configuration is enabled.
I'm talking about bringing official support to `java.time.Instant` in the same way as `java.time.OffsetDateTime` is officially supported, see https://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/query/#using-java-8-date-and-time-classes