> Anyway, imo the only issue is _when_ this kind of change should take
> place. My comment in the documentation did not promise that it would
> change in the next release, only that it might change in a future
> release. btw, I don't think that the ISO date style is mandated by the
> SQL92 standard, but it does seem like a good idea, particularly as we
> approach y2k...
> 
> Of course, since we now have the PGDATESTYLE environment variable,
> usable by both the backend (at startup) and libpq (at connect time),
> perhaps a change in default date format is not something to worry about
> too much.
> 
> I haven't heard any negative comments (yet) about changing the default
> date format to ISO-8601 (yyyy-mm-dd). Does anyone have a strong feeling
> that this should _not_ happen for v6.4??
> 
> Speak up or it might happen ;)

I'll cast my vote FOR it if it helps speed it along.

That format makes sorting/ordering a no-brainer.  Might not help inside
postgres, but for putting result sets out to a flat file for script
processing, you could then use the unix sort command.  Much easier...

Go for it, whenever.

darrenk

Thu, 30 Apr 1998 09:17:53 -0400
darrenk@insightdist.com (Darren King)
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC