Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> I just don't see what use a timestamp that doesn't represent a particular time
> would ever be. It seems to serve only as a gotcha for unwary programmers who
> take the default.
I have a problem with that too :-( ... timestamptz seems much the more
generally useful type. But the SQL spec is pretty definite that
"timestamp" means "timestamp without time zone".
Is anybody interested in the idea of a GUC parameter to choose whether
"timestamp" means "timestamp with time zone" (useful) or "timestamp
without time zone" (anally spec-compliant)? Or would that just muddy
the waters even more than they are already? We already changed the
meaning once...
regards, tom lane
