On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> You could argue that pgBadger et al could just document that they don't
> support nonstandard timestamp formats ... but then it's really unclear why
> we're shifting the complexity burden in this direction rather than asking
> why the one proprietary application that wants the other thing can't cope
> with the existing format choice.
Well, the opposite side can argue exactly the contrary with the user
hat: why doesn't Postgres allow this kind of customization, knowing
that the other things running on my server can do it?
--
Michael