"Trevor Talbot" <quension@gmail.com> writes:
> On 10/11/07, Magne M=E6hre <Magne.Mahre@sun.com> wrote:
>> Trevor Talbot wrote:
>>> That situation might sound a bit contrived, but I think the real point
>>> is that even for some records of observed times, the local time is the
>>> authoritative one, not UTC.
>>
>> ...and for that scenario you have TIMESTAMP WITHOUT TIME ZONE
> But that doesn't give you DST-sensitive display for free, which is
> tempting for application use, especially if the application is meant
> to be suitably generic.
If you are dealing only in local time, what do you need timezone for at
all?
Also note the possibility of coercing one type to the other on-the-fly
for display, or using the AT TIME ZONE construct.
regards, tom lane
