X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9083DD1C4B9 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:13:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02705-05 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:12:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9407FD1C4C8 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:13:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6SHCrQ3015801; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:12:53 -0400 (EDT) To: Dmitry Tkach Cc: Denis Zaitsev , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Very strange 'now' behaviour in nested triggers. In-reply-to: <3F255813.1000401@openratings.com> References: <20030726193947.B1636@natasha.ward.six> <9412.1059229904@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20030727020104.A19865@natasha.ward.six> <4629.1059320950@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3F2552BF.5060100@openratings.com> <15184.1059411161@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3F255813.1000401@openratings.com> Comments: In-reply-to Dmitry Tkach message dated "Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:06:27 -0400" Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:12:53 -0400 Message-ID: <15800.1059412373@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200307/418 X-Sequence-Number: 14532 Dmitry Tkach writes: > Does it mean that the *application* (not the database) user would then > have to know the exact specific way to represent the current time in his > data entry form? > Such an application looks like (how do I say it politely?) not a very > user-friendly one to me :-) So? "now()" is certainly not more user-friendly than "now". My point is that wherever you are making the decision that you want to input current time, there may be layers between you and the database that will only want to pass data-value strings and not function invocations. regards, tom lane