Bruce Momjian wrote: > It is not clear to me; is this its own transaction or a function call? >
That looks like an anonymous PL/SQL procedure to me. Another question might be, given: "more than one reference to one or more <datetime value function>s, then all such references are effectively evaluated simultaneously" under what conditions does Oracle report *the same* value for CURRENT_TIMESTAMP? So far, in this discussion, we have the following scenarios: 1. RDBMS start: No one 2. Session start: No one 3. Transaction start: PostgreSQL 4. Statement start: ??? 5. CURRENT_TIMESTAMP evaluation: Oracle 9, ??? Given what Tom has posted regarding the standard, I think Oracle is wrong. I'm wondering how the others handle multiple references in CURRENT_TIMESTAMP in a single stored procedure/function invocation. It seems to me that the lower bound is #4, not #5, and the upper bound is implementation dependent. Therefore PostgreSQL is in compliance, but its compliance is not very popular. Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Dan Langille wrote: >> >> >>DECLARE >> time1 TIMESTAMP; >> time2 TIMESTAMP; >> sleeptime NUMBER; >>BEGIN >> sleeptime := 5; >> SELECT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP INTO time1 FROM DUAL; >> DBMS_LOCK.SLEEP(sleeptime); >> SELECT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP INTO time2 FROM DUAL; >> DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE(TO_CHAR(time1)); >> DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE(TO_CHAR(time2)); >>END; >>/ >>30-SEP-02 11.54.09.583576 AM >>30-SEP-02 11.54.14.708333 AM >> >>PL/SQL procedure successfully completed. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
