On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 18:16 -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
> For conflict resolution purposes in an asynchronous multimaster system,
> the "last update" definition often comes into play. For this to work,
> the system must provide a monotonically increasing timestamp taken at
> the commit of a transaction.
Do you really need an actual timestamptz derived from the system clock,
or would a monotonically increasing 64-bit counter be sufficient? (The
assumption that the system clock is monotonically increasing seems
pretty fragile, in the presence of manual system clock changes, ntpd,
etc.)
> Comments, changes, additions?
Would this feature have any use beyond the specific project/algorithm
you have in mind?
-Neil
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
