Re: [SQL] [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Sullivan
Subject Re: [SQL] [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
Date
Msg-id 20021003195839.A16643@mail.libertyrms.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [SQL] [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 07:09:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> statement-arrival time.  (I like the idea of a parameterized version of
> now() to provide a consistent interface to all three functionalities.)

I like this, too.  I think it'd be probably useful.  But. . .

> pride of place to statement-arrival time.  In the end, I think that
> transaction-start time is the most commonly useful and safest variant,

. . .I also think this is true.  If I'm doing a bunch of database
operations in one transaction, there is a remarkably good argument
that they happened "at the same time".  After all, the marked passage
of time is probably just an unfortunate side effect of the inability
of my database can't process things instantaneously.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS                           Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info>                              M2P 2A8                                        +1 416 646 3304
x110



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Small patch for PL/Perl Misbehavior with Runtime Error Reporting
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Performance while loading data and indexing