Re: question on audit columns
От | Johannes Lochmann |
---|---|
Тема | Re: question on audit columns |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 242ee502-4b8e-49b5-b2f9-ffba6c678ca2@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: question on audit columns (Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: question on audit columns
|
Список | pgsql-general |
... and (3) the values are not updated on manual actions without triggers - which might or might not be desirable depending on the intention. Best, Johannes On 9/4/2024 16:36, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/4/24 06:17, Khan Muhammad Usman wrote: >> Yes this would be the better approach. > > 1) Except the overhead is now shifted to the application, which may or > not be better. You are also moving the audit responsibility to the > application and the application maintainers and making it application > specific. If a new application/client starts hitting the database and > it did not get the memo about the audit fields they won't be filled in. > > 2) I would recommend setting up a some realistic tests and see if the > overhead of the update triggers would be a concern. > > >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: