On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 11:13:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> The other thing that could be thought about here is when to freeze the
> value of now(). Currently now() is frozen when BEGIN is received.
> We could keep doing that, but it seems to me it would make more sense
> to freeze now() when the transaction snapshot is established. In a
> very real sense, the transaction snapshot defines "when the transaction
> starts" --- so shouldn't now() agree?
Yes, I saw this in the code and wondered about the inconsistency. I
agree the timestamp should be taken at the same time as the snapshot.
While at this, what do you think about adding the necessary variables
to make now('transaction') and now('query') possible?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"En las profundidades de nuestro inconsciente hay una obsesiva necesidad
de un universo lógico y coherente. Pero el universo real se halla siempre
un paso más allá de la lógica" (Irulan)
