Re: Weird procedure question
От
digimer
Тема
Re: Weird procedure question
Дата
Msg-id
cf63c1e5-671a-7f7f-2411-8eef964c3a33@alteeve.ca
Ответ на
Re: Weird procedure question (James Keener)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Weird procedure question digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>
Re: Weird procedure question Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>
Re: Weird procedure question digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>
Re: Weird procedure question digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>
Re: Weird procedure question digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>
Re: Weird procedure question James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com>
Re: Weird procedure question digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>
Re: Weird procedure question James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com>
Re: Weird procedure question James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com>
Re: Weird procedure question digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>
Re: Weird procedure question Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@gmail.com>
On 2018-09-25 1:33 a.m., James Keener wrote: > Do you need a single field for the pk or can you just make it the > (original_table_pk, modified_time)? Alternatively, you could generate > a uuid v3 from the (original_table_pk, modified_time) using something > like uuid_generate_v3(uuid_nil(), original_table_pk || ":" || > modified_time)? I need to preset the modified_time, I can't use now() or else the value would differ between databases. Also, unless I am missing something, uuid_generate_v3() would generate a different UUID per trigger of the procedure, so I'd end up with different history_uuids on each database that I ran the query against. If I am missing something (and entirely possible I am), please hit me with a clue stick. :) digimer
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления