From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Aaron Held <aaron@MetroNY.com>
Cc: Roberto Mello <rmello@cc.usu.edu>
Cc: Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 13:49:27 -0700
Message-ID: <200209231349.27237.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200209232041.g8NKfix19001@candle.pha.pa.us>
References: <200209232041.g8NKfix19001@candle.pha.pa.us>
Bruce,
> I don't see how we can defend returning the start of the transaction as
> the current_timestamp. In a multi-statement transaction, that doesn't
> seem very current to me. I know there are some advantages to returning
> the same value for all queries in a transaction, but is that value worth
> returning such stale time information?
Then what *was* the reasoning behind the current behavior?
--
-Josh Berkus
______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________
Josh Berkus
Complete information technology josh@agliodbs.com
and data management solutions (415) 565-7293
for law firms, small businesses fax 621-2533
and non-profit organizations. San Francisco
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, mkoi-pg@aon.at, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, aaron@MetroNY.com, rmello@cc.usu.edu, neilc@samurai.com
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
In-Reply-To: <200209231349.27237.josh@agliodbs.com>
* 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