| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: time stops within transaction |
| Date: | 2000-10-18 15:41:13 |
| Message-ID: | 4931.971883673@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> That is what now() is defined to return: transaction start time.
> Then CURRENT_TIMESTAMP is in violation of SQL.
Au contraire, if it did not behave that way it would violate the spec.
See SQL92 6.8 general rule 3:
3) If an SQL-statement generally contains more than one reference
to one or more <datetime value function>s, then all such ref-
erences are effectively evaluated simultaneously. The time of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
evaluation of the <datetime value function> during the execution
of the SQL-statement is implementation-dependent.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael J Schout | 2000-10-18 15:42:38 | Re: The lightbulb just went on... |
| Previous Message | Alfred Perlstein | 2000-10-18 15:40:31 | Re: INHERITS doesn't offer enough functionality |