Open
Conversation
Collaborator
|
👋 @iStefo Thank you!
ClickHouse treats "text" timestamps as local instead of UTC and converts them to either the server's timezone or the column definition's timezone, which felt like a correct default behaviour for NaiveDataTime. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I noticed that DateTime params close to epoch weren't encoded correctly, resulting in a query error. The reason is this bug report, which won't be fixed: ClickHouse/ClickHouse#64708
As a workaround, I pad the encoded seconds with leading zeros, taking special care to not break in the case of negative values.
This actually lead to the discovery of another bug, ClickHouse/ClickHouse#96745. We can wait for initial feedback on that one before we commit (and either fixate the unexpected behavior in the test or not).
I noticed that NaiveDataTime always uses ISO 8601 format, is there a specific reason for this or should we unify the encoding of both data types?