Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> (I believe the previous discussion also agreed that we wanted to >> postpone the freezing of now(), which currently also happens at >> BEGIN rather than the first command after BEGIN.)
> That doesn't make sense to me: from a user's perspective, the "start > of the transaction" is when the BEGIN is issued, regardless of any > tricks we may play in the backend. That's defensible when the user issued the BEGIN himself. When the BEGIN is coming from some interface library's autocommit logic, it's a lot less defensible. If you consult the archives, you will find actual user complaints about "why is now() returning a very old time?" that we traced to use of interface layers that handle "commit()" by issuing "COMMIT; BEGIN;". When BEGIN actually is issued by live application logic, I'd expect it to be followed immediately by some kind of command --- so the user would be unable to tell the difference in practice. Hannu moved this thread to -hackers, please follow up there if you want to discuss it more. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org