3 ms·
Why is this too often? We already need to update tzdata continuously. The problem is that it is not often enough to force you to have a good process in place.
by aeyes 4y ago
Why is this too often? We already need to update tzdata continuously.
The problem is that it is not often enough to force you to have a good process in place.
- vbezhenar 4y agoSo another option is to adjust to 1/100 second every few months, so good processes will have to appear, one way or another.
- nullc 4y ago> So another option is to adjust to 1/100 second every few months That's pretty awful. We have a lot of systems now which care about duration. Any scheme that makes a time span unpredictable will cause problems. Doing it more often means more problems. The only improvement is that you hope that the things that care about 1/100th of a second differences are rare enough that disturbing thing many times more often is a good tradeoff. This isn't a good bet especially because at time goes on we build faster and more stable systems that care about tighter and tighter synchronization.
- willis936 4y agoBecause tzdata is based off of political boundaries and decisions. If I'm making a dataset that needs continuous timestamps for multiple decades then UTC is effectively off the table because of how under-specified and poorly implemented leap seconds are in various software. So what's left is TAI and GPS, fine enough but now users see the timestamped data as being several seconds off. So we use a translation layer but some HMIs don't allow that so it's best to just not do it at all. This reality is not unique. Thousands of engineers have walked down this path and asked "why?".