Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-3930-c3854769010@github.com>
From: "AFulgens (@AFulgens)" <noreply+AFulgens@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2026 16:28:01 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] issue #3930: Revert semantic calendar changes introduced with #3837
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-3930@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-3930@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: AFulgens
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 3854769010
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Issue: 3930
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/3930#issuecomment-3854769010
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

> Date and Timestamp were the only options at the time.

Exactly what I meant, sure. I'm just saying that correcting this semantical incorrectness now—what, 20 years down the line?—is not really feasable IMO anymore.

Reverting is fine, along as as 42.7.9 is the only released version that has this behaviour. This would mean that one can skip this and jump from 42.7.8 to 42.7.10 directly and notice no semantic change, everything stays consistent.

People who started to fill their database with 42.7.9 (which is as of this writing 21 days old) and will migrate to the currently hypothetical 42.7.10 with the behaviour reverted will see inconsistency in their data.

But that's my argument: I think that dropping and recreating 3 weeks of data is less hassle than creating a migration script for 15+ years of archive data, which would be the case for me. (I know, I sound selfish, but that's how I found the problem in the first place.)