public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
To: Simon Riggs <[email protected]>
Cc: Corey Huinker <[email protected]>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <[email protected]>
Cc: vignesh C <[email protected]>
Cc: Ibrar Ahmed <[email protected]>
Cc: Surafel Temesgen <[email protected]>
Cc: Vik Fearing <[email protected]>
Cc: Rémi Lapeyre <[email protected]>
Cc: Ryan Lambert <[email protected]>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Eli Marmor <[email protected]>
Cc: David Steele <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Cc: Georgios <[email protected]>
Cc: Li Japin <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:47:22 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANbhV-ERW0G1B=ALwa+Uh0XX975NnHUwFzDgtukeszowm3KRmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANbhV-F3S=5+5w19cowPwewBXSV3+C5T3BD327KQD7BLFgZbCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAN-V+g_7EC=kAVeQV=+XL+KoV=QLdx_79J55OBarEYd49_uHRA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANbhV-H-Wt7TVEwzzaYNEZ8-OteipdtvsxN1Qr1G9XpZoX2GgA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANbhV-EymXWOFdX-Sz7PqQ8kphqHMteErBgD=FxmE+uF7jVW4w@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CALAY4q-4YpPc=hSGpxCJBVwpTKzm2A5JyoXUr+2Lh0KTiUcjPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CALtqXTeMemTWNUQfa9_M+p=eOcvw5yLyfRReBu2BrAbo8rkYNw@mail.gmail.com>
<CALDaNm3-8ZvqFOcZwpN6MYV+Apk9=mHTL2SBJJsUmrR_ZdVznA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANbhV-GeD9PWHMkrZLV2vHASjFk3n2QFhGur6+o1gnAf5wymAg@mail.gmail.com>
<20210910183023.GB5852@ahch-to>
<CANbhV-F3JjkfEPffUwGX_rVrQhRRde360+V4-GOuUqJgt78r1g@mail.gmail.com>
<CADkLM=e5m4_4JBrX__V4J68rU9z8GpcsN3r1RNPcET-ZctG9Gg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADkLM=ca+9gYjE2bfPWu-rJFHQjGcwOkEep8d841-x4=-h8EZw@mail.gmail.com>
<CANbhV-ERW0G1B=ALwa+Uh0XX975NnHUwFzDgtukeszowm3KRmA@mail.gmail.com>
> On 19 Sep 2021, at 20:32, Simon Riggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> My preferred approach would be to do this "for free" in the table
> access method, but we're a long way from this in terms of actual
> implementation. When Corey suggested earlier that we just put the
> syntax in there, this was the direction I was thinking.
>
> After waiting a day since I wrote the above, I think we should go with
> (2) as Corey suggests, at least for now, and we can always add (3)
> later.
This patch no longer applies, are there plans on implementing the approaches
discussed above, or should we close this entry and open a new one when a
freshly baked pathed is ready?
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
view thread (97+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox