Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 16:32 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>> I realize it's a bit late, but it might not be a bad idea to use 
>> CURRENT_TIMESTAMP rather than NOW(), as it's per SQL spec.

> I can't say I can get very excited about it; someone is free to submit a
> patch if they like.

Considering that the example in question is embedded in the 100%-not-SQL-
standard language plpgsql, I can't get excited about this either.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to