| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |
| Date: | 2014-01-02 19:52:33 |
| Message-ID: | 14350.1388692353@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> We could certainly add a function that returns SETOF record, taking
> e.g. regclass as an argument, but it doesn't seem a stretch to me to
> think that you might want to get tuple header information for some but
> not all tuples in the relation, and I don't see any real good way to
> tell the function exactly what tuples you want except by invoking it
> once per TID.
I have no objection to having a function that retrieves the details for
a given TID alongside one that does it for a whole relation. The point
here is just that we should be headed in the direction of removing as
many system columns as we can, not adding more; especially not ones that
(a) have no purpose except forensics and (b) are virtually certain to
change across system versions.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2014-01-02 19:53:16 | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-01-02 19:48:41 | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |