Re: clock_timestamp() and transaction_timestamp() function

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Wang Mike <itlist(at)msn(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: clock_timestamp() and transaction_timestamp() function
Date: 2003-12-01 15:52:36
Message-ID: 22661.1070293956@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> This is a nonstarter, as is the previous proposal to have a single
>> function with an explicit parameter that selects the behavior. The
>> reason is that any such function would have to be treated as completely
>> non-optimizable.

> Why? We would just need to ensure that the mode cannot be changed at
> critical times.

"critical time" being anywhere within a session, I guess? Either that
or keep track of whether any cached plans depend on the stability
assumption.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-12-01 15:52:46 Re: clock_timestamp() and transaction_timestamp() function
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-12-01 15:50:55 Re: clock_timestamp() and transaction_timestamp() function