From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
Cc: Roland Roberts <roland@astrofoto.org>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 12:43:45 -0700
Message-ID: <200209291243.45747.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8140.1033274153@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20020929034706.GA6199@svana.org>
<20020929041007.GB6199@svana.org>
<8140.1033274153@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom,
> I'd be happier with the whole thing if anyone had exhibited a convincing
> use-case for statement timestamp. So far I've not seen any actual
> examples of situations that are not better served by either transaction
> timestamp or true current time. And the spec is perfectly clear that
> CURRENT_TIMESTAMP does not mean true current time...
Are we still planning on putting the three different versions of now() on the
TODO? I.e.,
now('transaction'),
now('statement'), and
now('immediate')
With now() = now('transaction')?
I still think it's a good idea, provided that we have some easy means to
determine now('statement').
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
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, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, kleptog@svana.org, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, mkoi-pg@aon.at, roland@astrofoto.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
In-Reply-To: <200209291243.45747.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