Re: (Fwd) Re: Any Oracle 9 users? A test please...

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
Cc: Yury Bokhoncovich <byg(at)center-f1(dot)ru>, Dan Langille <dan(at)langille(dot)org>, Roland Roberts <roland(at)astrofoto(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: Any Oracle 9 users? A test please...
Date: 2002-10-02 15:41:48
Message-ID: 200210021541.g92FfnZ13393@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Mike Mascari wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Mike Mascari wrote:
> >>
> >>Oracle isn't processing those statements interactively. SQL*Plus
> >>is waiting on the "/" to send the PL/SQL block to the database.
> >>I suspect its not going to take Oracle more than a second to
> >>insert a row...
> >
> >
> > Oh, I understand now. He delayed when entering the function body, but
> > that has no effect when he sends it. Can someone add an explicit sleep
> > in the function body and try that?
> >
>
> SQL> create table foo (a date);
>
> Table created.
>
> SQL> begin
> 2 insert into foo select sysdate from dual;
> 3 dbms_lock.sleep(5);
> 4 insert into foo select sysdate from dual;
> 5 end;
> 6 /
>
> PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
>
> SQL> select to_char(a, 'HH24:MI:SS') from foo;
>
> TO_CHAR(
> --------
> 11:31:02
> 11:31:07

OK, two requests. First, would you create a _named_ PL/SQL function
with those contents and try it again. Also, would you test
CURRENT_TIMESTAMP too?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-02 15:45:40 Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Previous Message Vince Vielhaber 2002-10-02 15:34:21 Re: Release of 7.2.3