Re: proposal: add columns created and altered to pg_proc and pg_class
| От | Kevin Grittner |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: proposal: add columns created and altered to pg_proc and pg_class |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 49E45708.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: proposal: add columns created and altered to pg_proc and pg_class (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: proposal: add columns created and altered to pg_proc
and pg_class
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > I though about it too. But I am not sure, if this isn't too > complicated solution for simple task. If I thing little bit more - > main important is timestamp of last change. Yeah, if it would be too heavy to add a timestamp column or two to pg_class and maybe one or two others, why is it better to add a whole new table to maintain in parallel -- with it's own primary key, foreign keys (or similar integrity enforcement mechanism), etc. Others apparently see a bigger advantage to this than I, but if it's not something I can just eyeball while I'm looking at the object definition, it isn't likely to save me much over going to other sources. Let's not over-engineer this. -Kevin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: