Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> Let's switch 'timestamp with time zone' back to 'timestamp'. This just
>> makes no sense.
> I wasn't following that discussion. Why would we have a timestamp with
> no timezone anyway?
The discussion isn't about what the datatype *does*, but only about what
it's *called*.
We currently transform requests for "timestamp", "timestamp with
timezone", and "timestamp without timezone" into the same "timestamp"
datatype. This is fine by me. However, I think that that datatype
should display as just "timestamp" in psql displays and pg_dump output.
The datatype does not act exactly the same as SQL92's "timestamp with
timezone", so it seems to me that displaying it that way just confuses
people.
However, Thomas disagreed when last heard from...
regards, tom lane