From: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.300.87.4.3\))
Subject: Re: Before image of selective columns.
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 06:40:59 -0700
References: 
 <CAHOGQfV_CHuMJ+yo3YoYCMsajedejRa1=X84shGMSi8CKhCo5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <cd9052dd58672c9bb9718736a7de3de2edfb2a45.camel@cybertec.at>
To: Gambhir Singh <gambhir.singh05@gmail.com>,
 pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <cd9052dd58672c9bb9718736a7de3de2edfb2a45.camel@cybertec.at>
Message-Id: <E5FB3E07-51B3-4B6F-B9EF-5D5114648206@elevated-dev.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/E5FB3E07-51B3-4B6F-B9EF-5D5114648206%40elevated-dev.com>
Precedence: bulk

> On Jan 10, 2025, at 2:55=E2=80=AFAM, Laurenz Albe =
<laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
>=20
> That looks like a job for a trigger; perhaps a statement level trigger
> with a transition table.

Indeed.

I just want to add from experience: put the row values into a JSON =
column in the audit table. Otherwise, what do you do when the table =
definition changes? It's not just that you would have to keep the audit =
table schema in sync, it's possible to have a change which is not =
compatible with the old definition, such that you now really can't have =
one table that covers both old and new exactly, and then have to resort =
to renaming columns or some such...=