On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 19:34 +0900, Vlad Arkhipov wrote:
> What's wrong with SPI/timetravel extension for system versioning?
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/contrib-spi.html
>
> We are heavily using system-versioned and application-time period
> tables in our enterprise products (most of them are bi-temporal).
> However our implementation is based on triggers and views and
> therefore is not very convenient to use. There are also some locking
> issues with foreign keys to application-time period tables. It will be
> great if the new temporal SQL features will be included in the
> Postgresql core with SQL 2011 syntax support. It is especially
> important for bi-temporal tables because of complex internal logic of
> UPDATE/DELETE and huge SELECT queries for such tables.
I've already pointed out some missing features in this thread, but the
big ones in my mind are:
1. It doesn't use 9.2 Range Types, which would help in a lot of ways
(like making the SELECT queries a lot simpler and faster).
2. It's missing a lot of options, like storing the user that modified a
row or the changed columns.
Regards,Jeff Davis