Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D82B8476122; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 11:10:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ece.rice.edu (ece.rice.edu [128.42.4.34])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6E552475E8C; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 11:10:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ece.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AC3A068AB4; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:10:05 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from wallace.ece.rice.edu (wallace.ece.rice.edu [128.42.12.154])
	by ece.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 19E8E68AD2; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:10:04 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from reedstrm by wallace.ece.rice.edu with local (Exim 3.34 #1
	(Debian)) id 17trK7-000235-00; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:10:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:10:03 -0500
From: "Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu>
To: Roland Roberts <roland@astrofoto.org>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
Message-ID: <20020924151003.GC7612@rice.edu>
Mail-Followup-To: "Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@ece.rice.edu>,
	Roland Roberts <roland@astrofoto.org>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-general@postgresql.org
References: <21724.1032793386@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200209231506.g8NF6JP13779@candle.pha.pa.us>
	<0meuousc373fdokv3bbke116jsbkpakno2@4ax.com>
	<22827.1032800742@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<kgmuouku2imliobrrck45ugkc0hlrkbo1v@4ax.com>
	<20020924011912.GA16430@svana.org>
	<m2fzvzv3ma.fsf@kuiper.rlent.pnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m2fzvzv3ma.fsf@kuiper.rlent.pnet>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020300
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517
X-Archive-Number: 200209/305
X-Sequence-Number: 9582

On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 10:55:41AM -0400, Roland Roberts wrote:
> >>>>> "Martijn" == Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
> 
>     Martijn> Well, what I would suggest is that when you wrap several
>     Martijn> statements into a single transaction with begin/commit,
>     Martijn> the whole lot could be considered a single statement
>     Martijn> (since they form an atomic transaction so in a sense they
>     Martijn> are all executed simultaneously). And hence Postgresql is
>     Martijn> perfectly compliant.
> 
> FWIW, and not that I am an Oracle fan :-), Oracle seems to interpret
> this the same way when using a "select sysdate from dual" inside a
> transaction.

Oh, interesting datapoint. Let me get this clear - on oracle, the
equivalent of:

BEGIN;
SELECT current_timestamp;
<go off to lunch, come back>
SELECT current_timestamp;
END;

will give two identical timestamps?

Ross