Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures
Date
Msg-id 4ff8e6a2-c585-02fe-3f20-b9aa26fa2c4f@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 28/09/2018 09:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> That's certainly a good argument.  Note that if we implemented that the
>> transaction timestamp is advanced inside procedures, that would also
>> mean that the transaction timestamp as observed in pg_stat_activity
>> would move during VACUUM, for example.  That might or might not be
>> desirable.
> 
> Attached is a rough implementation.
> 
> I'd be mildly in favor of doing this, but we have mentioned tradeoffs in
> this thread.

So do we want to do this or not?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: Tuple conversion naming
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: Slotification of partition tuple conversion