| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Will LaShell <will(at)lashell(dot)net>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Help with count(*) |
| Date: | 2003-11-15 20:20:43 |
| Message-ID: | 87isllbcys.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> (I believe the previous discussion also agreed that we wanted to
> postpone the freezing of now(), which currently also happens at
> BEGIN rather than the first command after BEGIN.)
That doesn't make sense to me: from a user's perspective, the "start
of the transaction" is when the BEGIN is issued, regardless of any
tricks we may play in the backend.
Making now() return the time the current transaction started is
reasonably logical; making now() return "the time when the first
command after the BEGIN in the current transaction was issued" makes a
lot less sense to me.
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Derek Morr | 2003-11-15 20:57:33 | Re: [CORE] 7.4RC2 regression failur and not running |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-11-15 18:14:34 | Re: [CORE] 7.4RC2 regression failur and not running stats |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2003-11-16 11:58:08 | start of transaction (was: Re: [PERFORM] Help with count(*)) |
| Previous Message | radha.manohar | 2003-11-15 14:52:45 | Re: Error in transaction processing |