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