Re: [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I see what you are saying now --- that even single user statements can
> > trigger multiple statements, so you would have to say transaction start
> > time is time the user query starts.  I can see how that seems a little
> > arbitrary.  However, don't we have separate paths for user queries and
> > queries sent as part of a rule?
> 
> We could use "time of arrival of the latest client command string",
> if we wanted to do something like this.  My point is that that very
> arbitrarily assumes that those are the significant points within a
> transaction, and that the client has no need to send multiple commands
> that want to insert the same timestamp into different tables.  This is
> an unwarranted assumption about the client's control structure, IMHO.
> 
> A possible compromise is to dissociate now() and current_timestamp,
> allowing the former to be start of transaction and the latter to be
> start of client command.

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.

-- 
  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, Pennsylvania 19073