table-api-not-returning-response-when-z-is-included-in-timestamp

sameerk91509955
Giga Contributor

The api/now/v1/table API does not return any results when the sys_updated_on filter includes a trailing Z, even though the timestamps are sent in correct UTC format.

 

For example, no records are returned for the following filter:

sys_updated_on>2026-01-20T16:21:52Z^sys_updated_on<2026-01-20T19:23:10Z


However, the API returns the expected results when the same filter is used without the Z suffix:

sys_updated_on>2026-01-20T16:21:52^sys_updated_on<2026-01-20T19:23:10


The only difference between the two queries is the presence of Z.  This behaviour is observed in one servicenow instance but in one of other dev instance it is working fine with proper UTC date with `Z`


Instance (not working with Z)

Build name: Zurich

Build date: 12-25-2025_1331

Build tag: glide-zurich-07-01-2025__patch4-hotfix3-12-23-2025

MID buildstamp: zurich-07-01-2025__patch4-hotfix3-12-23-2025_12-25-2025_1331

 

Any reason why it is happening, is it a known issue? any breaking changes from servicenow side?

3 REPLIES 3

Ankur Bawiskar
Tera Patron

@sameerk91509955 

ServiceNow Table API expects date/time without Z i.e. it uses the normal format YYYY-MM-dd HH:mm:ss and doesn't support ISO 8601 format I believe

The API treats date/time fields as UTC and hence Z not required

💡 If my response helped, please mark it as correct and close the thread 🔒— this helps future readers find the solution faster! 🙏

Regards,
Ankur
Certified Technical Architect  ||  9x ServiceNow MVP  ||  ServiceNow Community Leader

@sameerk91509955 

Hope you are doing good.

Did my reply answer your question?

💡 If my response helped, please mark it as correct and close the thread 🔒— this helps future readers find the solution faster! 🙏

Regards,
Ankur
Certified Technical Architect  ||  9x ServiceNow MVP  ||  ServiceNow Community Leader

@Ankur Bawiskar Thanks for the response.
Is there any official documentation for this? It seems to be working for some instances but not for others, so we’d like to follow the documented approach to ensure smooth integration.Looks like something got recently change and is breaking things but could not find relevant release notes