Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-3482-c2598820529@github.com>
From: "BbIKTOP (@BbIKTOP)" <noreply+BbIKTOP@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 17:13:46 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] issue #3482: When using java.sql.Timestamp for update, an exception thrown
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-3482@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-3482@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: BbIKTOP
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 2598820529
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Edited-At: 2025-01-17T17:17:02Z
X-GitHub-Issue: 3482
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/3482#issuecomment-2598820529
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

> [@davecramer](https://github.com/davecramer) It's best to cast all three, not just the `ts`. [OP opened a thread on Stack Overflow](https://stackoverflow.com/a/79365499/5298879), where I added an explanation what's happening exactly, including the null case.

@Zegarek0 

I agree that according to the specs it might be required to specify the type of the null value. It's ok. But my report was about java.sql.Timestamp, and as I see it now, it is definitely a bug.