From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Message-Id: <200209240201.g8O216G22740@candle.pha.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
In-Reply-To: <200209231853.36530.josh@agliodbs.com>
To: josh@agliodbs.com
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:01:06 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>,
	Aaron Held <aaron@MetroNY.com>, Roberto Mello <rmello@cc.usu.edu>,
	Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Josh Berkus wrote:
> 
> Tom, Bruce,
> 
> > > A possible compromise is to dissociate now() and current_timestamp,
> > > allowing the former to be start of transaction and the latter to be
> > > start of client command.
> > 
> > I was thinking 'transaction_timestamp' for the transaction start time, and
> > current_timestamp for the statement start time.  I would equate now()
> > with current_timestamp.
> 
> May I point out that this will break compatibility for those used to the 
> current behavior?

I am not saying we have to make that change.  My point is that our
current behavior may not be the most intuitive, and that most people may
prefer a change.  Any such change would be documented in the release
notes.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073