Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"
Date
Msg-id 20130103021206.GX16126@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"
List pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> If I believed that it would be a hundred-line patch, and would *stay*
> a hundred-line patch, I'd be fine with it.  But it won't.  I will
> bet a very fine dinner that the feature wouldn't get out the door
> before there would be demands for pg_dump support.

Fine, how about a function that can be called by pg_dump (and anyone
else who has the rights and feels the need) to set that value?  That
avoids all need for any new syntax and still gives us the pg_dump and
friends support that will apparently be asked for.

> And arguments
> about whether ALTER should or should not change the timestamp.

There is no case where ALTER should change the *creation* time, imo.

> And I doubt you counted psql \d support in that hundred lines.
> So this is just a can of worms that I'd rather not open.

The last psql \d support change that I looked at (thanks Jon) had a
diffstat (excluding documentation and whitespace changes) of:

sfrost@beorn:/home/sfrost/Downloads> cat qq | diffstat               describe.c |    5 +++++1 file changed, 5
insertions(+)

Just saying. ;)
Thanks,
    Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Problematic dependency in plpython Makefile [Windows]