From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, Aaron Held <aaron(at)MetroNY(dot)com>, Roberto Mello <rmello(at)cc(dot)usu(dot)edu>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Date: | 2002-09-24 03:37:45 |
Message-ID: | 200209240337.g8O3bjq01954@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > 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.
>
> So you want to both (a) invent even more nonstandard syntax than we
> already have, and (b) break as many traditional-Postgres applications
> as you possibly can?
No, but I would like to see you stop makeing condescending replies to
emails. How is that!
> 'transaction_timestamp' has no reason to live. It's not in the spec.
> And AFAIK the behavior of now() has been well-defined since the
> beginning of Postgres. If you want to change 'current_timestamp' to
> conform to a rather debatable reading of the spec, then fine --- but
> keep your hands off of now().
Oh, really. When you get down off your chair we can vote on it.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-24 03:44:37 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2002-09-24 03:36:35 | Re: DBLink: interesting issue |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-24 03:44:37 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2002-09-24 03:36:35 | Re: DBLink: interesting issue |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-24 03:44:37 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-24 03:35:13 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |