Re: Audit Logs WAS: temporal support patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Audit Logs WAS: temporal support patch
Date
Msg-id 1345696473.9847.26.camel@jdavis
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Audit Logs WAS: temporal support patch  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 17:56 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I don't think the concerns I raised about apparent order of
> execution for serializable transactions apply to audit logs.  If
> we've moved entirely off the topic of the original subject, it is a
> complete non-issue.

Now I'm confused. The serializability issues you were talking about only
seem to matter with respect to system time (a.k.a. transaction time),
right? If the user is supplying the time, then it's a non-issue.

And audit logs are based on system time, so I thought that audit logs
were the case you were talking about.

Regards,Jeff Davis




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: A caveat of partitioning tables in the document
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ...