From: | Petr Korobeinikov <pkorobeinikov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org >> PG-General Mailing List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Freezing localtimestamp and other time function on some value |
Date: | 2016-04-12 12:11:27 |
Message-ID: | CAJL5ff9pVuE9cwuHod+iZtr3X57yUnrMW9ZYVzBaB7drOwmcXQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Sorry.
I have re-read my previous message.
It looks unclean.
For sequential calls in same transaction `now()` and `current_timestamp`
will produce the same output.
```
begin; -- start a transaction
select
now() immutable_now,
current_timestamp immutable_current_ts,
clock_timestamp() mutable_clock_ts;
select pg_sleep(1); -- wait a couple of time
select
now() immutable_now, -- same as above
current_timestamp immutable_current_ts, -- same as above
clock_timestamp() mutable_clock_ts; -- value changed
select pg_sleep(1); -- wait a couple of time again
select
now() immutable_now, -- same as above
current_timestamp immutable_current_ts, -- same as above
clock_timestamp() mutable_clock_ts; -- value changed
commit; -- commit or rollback
```
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rakesh Kumar | 2016-04-12 12:13:16 | Re: Freezing localtimestamp and other time function on some value |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-04-12 11:47:55 | Re: Freezing localtimestamp and other time function on some value |