From: | Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Aaron Held <aaron(at)MetroNY(dot)com>, Roberto Mello <rmello(at)cc(dot)usu(dot)edu>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Date: | 2002-09-24 09:16:20 |
Message-ID: | 9ka0puk83umng8f1va1pjiti5gpksdto3j@4ax.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 13:36:59 -0700, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
wrote:
>I, for one, would judge that the start time of the statement is "during the
>execution"; it would only NOT be "during the execution" if it was a value
>*before* the start time of the statement. It's a semantic argument.
Josh, you're right, I meant closed interval.
>Further, we could not change that behaviour without breaking many people's
>applications.
>
>Ideally, since we get this question a lot, that a compile-time or
>execution-time switch to change the behavior of current_timestamp
>contextually would be nice.
Yes, GUC!
>We just need someone who;s interested enough in
>writing one.
First we need someone who decyphers SQL99's wording.
Servus
Manfred
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-09-24 09:37:30 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2002-09-24 09:09:21 | Re: pg_attribute |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-09-24 09:37:30 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Previous Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-09-24 08:33:51 | Re: [SQL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-09-24 09:37:30 | Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
Previous Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-09-24 08:33:51 | Re: [SQL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |