Re: Support for DATETIMEOFFSET - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeremy Morton
Subject Re: Support for DATETIMEOFFSET
Date
Msg-id 6d8f7fc6-41a4-aa16-7099-30b74eadef74@game-point.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Support for DATETIMEOFFSET  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Support for DATETIMEOFFSET  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
How could the ORM use timestamptz when that doesn't actually store 
both a datetime and an offset?

-- 
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)

Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeremy Morton <postgres@game-point.net> writes:
>> Surely the fact that you'll lose data if you try to store a common
>> .NET datatype with any kind of ORM (eg. EF, which is pretty popular)
>> right now, using "the world's most advanced open source relational
>> database", is reason enough to support it?
> 
> If the ORM somehow prevents you from using timestamptz, that's a
> bug in the ORM.  If it doesn't, the above is just a hysterical
> claim with no factual foundation.
> 
>             regards, tom lane
> 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Lexer issues
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: While restoring -getting error if dump contain sql statementsgenerated from generated.sql file