On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:20:30AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > AFAIR, the only state that's guaranteed to work like that is > statement_timestamp. Of course you have to worry whether your machine > is fast enough to do more than one client interaction within whatever > the clock resolution is. i'll check it, thanks for tip. > I think the real question here is why you want this behavior at all; > to me it smells of not having thought the problem through correctly. > As an example of why this bothers me: what if the user's query is > rewritten into several queries by a RULE? Should you consider each > of those to be a separate user-issued SQL command? Does your answer > change if you know that the user himself prepared the RULE? (Do you > think users will be happy if statement X followed by statement Y > acts differently in a rule than elsewhere?) definitelly. i need this only for some specific functions operating within selects. i'll blog it as soon as i'll get all the details :) depesz -- quicksil1er: "postgres is excellent, but like any DB it requires a highly paid DBA. here's my CV!" :) http://www.depesz.com/ - blog dla ciebie (i moje CV) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
