Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I was thinking 'transaction_timestamp' for the transaction start time, and > > current_timestamp for the statement start time. I would equate now() > > with current_timestamp. > > So you want to both (a) invent even more nonstandard syntax than we > already have, and (b) break as many traditional-Postgres applications > as you possibly can?
No, but I would like to see you stop makeing condescending replies to emails. How is that! > 'transaction_timestamp' has no reason to live. It's not in the spec. > And AFAIK the behavior of now() has been well-defined since the > beginning of Postgres. If you want to change 'current_timestamp' to > conform to a rather debatable reading of the spec, then fine --- but > keep your hands off of now(). Oh, really. When you get down off your chair we can vote on it. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
