From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 06:28:22 -0400
Message-ID: <20180921102822.GA22699@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180921053425.GM1338@paquier.xyz>
References: <20180920234040.GC29981@momjian.us>
<20180921045536.GJ1338@paquier.xyz>
<20180921051206.bzfiew4nthmunpbj@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20180921053425.GM1338@paquier.xyz>
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 02:34:25PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:12:06PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Isn't the point that transaction_timestamp() does *not* currently change
> > its value, even though the transaction (although not the outermost
> > statement) has finished?
>
> Ouch, yes. I see the point now. Indeed that's strange to not have a
> new transaction timestamp after commit within the DO block..
So, this puts us in an odd position. Right now everyone knows that
statement_timestamp() is only changed by the outer statement, i.e., a
SELECT in a function doesn't change statement_timestamp(). So, there
is an argument that transaction_timestamp() should do the same and not
change in a function --- in fact, if it does change, it would mean that
transaction_timestamp() changes in a function, but statement_timestamp()
doesn't --- that seems very odd. It would mean that new statements in a
function don't change statement_timestamp(), but new transctions in a
function do --- again, very odd.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, michael@paquier.xyz, andres@anarazel.de
Subject: Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures
In-Reply-To: <20180921102822.GA22699@momjian.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox