public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Nem Tudom <[email protected]>
To: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-general <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Issues with EPOCH-s, TIMESTAMP(TZ)-s and leap seconds.
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 14:00:20 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+awD-hDwp5bL2kLfv_5oVPd6AoWbN4=qEKiRZkzX7ttQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CA+hUKG+awD-hDwp5bL2kLfv_5oVPd6AoWbN4=qEKiRZkzX7ttQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 28/01/2025 00:05, Thomas Munro wrote:
Thanks to you and all the others who took the trouble to reply,
> I showed the bones of how you could do this in SQL here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BhUKGLU9Don4YHnfdzn0eeWQsUu8GJDaLiUAefLLT6%3DmmeGoQ%40mail...
The technical explanation is much appreciated - I'd gathered (more or
less) as much from my searching and reading the leap second Wiki.
So, the situation is that, basically, leap seconds are "fudged" to use
the technical term!
I asked the question with a view to having accurate TIMESTAMP
differences - i.e. to the second. However, since everyone is fudging
(incl. AFAICS Oracle and SQL Server), this means that accepting the
status quo will just make my inaccuracies will be the same as everyone
else's, ergo I'm golden!
At least that's one issue that I can safely ignore - I didn't fancy
implementing this on my own.
Thanks again and rgs,
E!
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Issues with EPOCH-s, TIMESTAMP(TZ)-s and leap seconds.
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox