Re: Changing behavior of BEGIN...sleep...do something...COMMIT
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Changing behavior of BEGIN...sleep...do something...COMMIT |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200303300222.h2U2M9w29262@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Changing behavior of BEGIN...sleep...do something...COMMIT (Doug McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Changing behavior of BEGIN...sleep...do something...COMMIT
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Doug McNaught wrote: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > > > Accordingly, it's a bad idea to invent now('clock') and make it the > > same function as the other flavors. We could get away with making > > now('transaction') and now('statement') ---- but the argument for this > > was consistency, and that argument pretty much falls flat if those two > > are one function while clock time is something else. > > > > So I'm back in the camp of thinking three separate parameterless > > functions are the way to do it. We already know what now() does, > > and we're not going to change it --- anyone want to propose names > > for the other two? > > Maybe clock_time() and statement_time(), with transaction_time() an > alias for now() (if that's seemed necessary)? Agreed on the need to not use args for now(). We already have CURRENT_TIMESTAMP. Would CLOCK_TIMESTAMP, TRANSACTION_TIMESTAMP, and STATEMENT_TIMESTAMP make sense, with CURRENT_TIMESTAMP being the same as TRANSACTION_TIMESTAMP? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: