| From: | "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Thomas Lockhart" <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Andrew Sullivan" <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
| Date: | 2002-10-04 16:14:04 |
| Message-ID: | 015701c26bc1$10f05040$4201a8c0@beeblebrox |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Yes, clearly, we will need to have all three time values available to
> users. With three people now suggesting we don't change, I will just
> add to TODO:
>
> Add now("transaction|statement|clock") functionality
>
> Is that good?
CURRENT_TIMESTAMP etc. are converted to now()::TIMESTAMP, at least in 7.2,
right?
So when there are all three options available, it would be easy to change
the behaviour of CURRENT_DATE/TIME/TIMESTAMP, right?
SET .. or GUC would be options, no?
Best Regards,
Michael Paesold
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Curtis Faith | 2002-10-04 16:22:39 | Re: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-04 16:10:22 | Re: numeric hierarchy again (was Re: floor function in 7.3b2) |