Hi Tom,
Am 31.12.2004 um 20:18 schrieb Tom Lane:
Matthias Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
a) is the name uptime() OK?
Probably should use pg_uptime(), or something else starting with pg_.
What about 'pg_starttime()' since it is not a period but a
point-in-time?
b) is the return-type
Matthias Schmidt wrote:
Hi Tom,
Am 31.12.2004 um 20:18 schrieb Tom Lane:
Matthias Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
a) is the name uptime() OK?
Probably should use pg_uptime(), or something else starting with pg_.
What about 'pg_starttime()' since it is not a period but a point-in-time?
b) is
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, the unix guys have the abit to have the uptime as an interval, I'm
inclined to have boths: pg_uptime ( interval ) and pg_starttime (
timestamptz )
Well for the OS these are not redundant values. The clock could have been
adjusted at any time.
Hi Bruce,
I started to work on the uptime() for the postmaster yesterday. A
couple of questions:
a) is the name uptime() OK?
b) is the return-type 'Interval' OK?
c) does it make sense (... fit in the scheme?) to place the code here:
src/backend/utils/misc/uptime.c
d) Can I piggy-back on
Matthias Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
a) is the name uptime() OK?
Probably should use pg_uptime(), or something else starting with pg_.
b) is the return-type 'Interval' OK?
It might be better to return the actual postmaster start time (as
timestamptz) and let the user do whatever
