Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp

"Theo Schlossnagle" <jesus@omniti.com> writes:

> As the clock must be incremented clusterwide, the need for it to be insync with
> the system clock (on any or all of the systems) is  obviated.  In fact, as you
> can't guarantee the synchronicity means  that it can be confusing -- one
> expects a time-based clock to be  accurate to the time.  A counter-based clock
> has no such expectations.

So if the nodes get split they can keep operating independently but clients
can see that there's no guarantee of ordering against transactions from other
nodes because the clock isn't advancing?

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com