From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table |
Date: | 2019-10-28 15:36:09 |
Message-ID: | b11fa573-38fa-ba57-96a9-e4dd9ce3fb76@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 28/10/2019 13:48, Surafel Temesgen wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:45 PM Vik Fearing
> <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com <mailto:vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> >
> > I don't understand what you mean by this.
> >
> >
> >
> > The primary purpose of adding row end time to primary key is to
> allow
> > duplicate value to be inserted into a table with keeping
> constraint in
> > current data but it can be duplicated in history data. Adding row
> > start time column to primary key will eliminate this uniqueness for
> > current data which is not correct
>
>
> How? The primary/unique keys must always be unique at every point
> in time.
>
>
> From user prospect it is acceptable to delete and reinsert a record
> with the same key value multiple time which means there will be
> multiple record with the same key value in a history data but there is
> only one values in current data as a table without system versioning
> do .I add row end time column to primary key to allow user supplied
> primary key values to be duplicated in history data which is acceptable
>
Yes, I understand that. I'm saying you should also add the row start
time column.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-10-28 15:38:09 | Re: Proposition to use '==' as synonym for 'IS NOT DISTINCT FROM' |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-10-28 15:35:47 | Re: Proposition to use '==' as synonym for 'IS NOT DISTINCT FROM' |