Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.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@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
