Re: timestamptz parsing bug?

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 08/29/2011 03:35 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> On Aug 29, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Do we actually *want* to support this?  The "T" is supposed to mean that
>>> the string is strictly ISO-conformant, no?

> In that case we shouldn't be accepting an abbreviation either.

Yeah, that would be the logical conclusion.  OTOH you could argue that
we don't want to remove the abbreviation case for backward-compatibility
reasons, in which case allowing full names as well is a reasonable
thing.  I don't know the answer, I'm just asking the question.
        regards, tom lane