Re: SQL:2011 application time - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Corey Huinker
Subject Re: SQL:2011 application time
Date
Msg-id CADkLM=e7MwRH02ZS6FBZD2-t4LnH-3swyzr9JF_jZrGGzBh7NA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SQL:2011 application time  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: SQL:2011 application time
List pgsql-hackers


On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 11:07 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
On 21.11.21 02:51, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> Here are updated patches. They are rebased and clean up some of my
> TODOs.

This patch set looks very interesting.  It's also very big, so it's
difficult to see how to get a handle on it.  I did a pass through it
to see if there were any obvious architectural or coding style
problems.  I also looked at some of your TODO comments to see if I had
something to contribute there.

I'm confused about how to query tables based on application time
periods.  Online, I see examples using AS OF, but in the SQL standard
I only see this used for system time, which we are not doing here.
What is your understanding of that?

Paul has previously supplied me with this document https://cs.ulb.ac.be/public/_media/teaching/infoh415/tempfeaturessql2011.pdf and that formed the basis of a lot of my questions a few months earlier.

There was similar work being done for system periods, which are a bit simpler but require a side (history) table to be created. I was picking people's brains about some aspects of system versioning to see if I could help bringing that into this already very large patchset, but haven't yet felt like I had done enough research to post it.

It is my hope that we can at least get the syntax for both application and system versioning committed, even if it's just stubbed in with not-yet-supported errors.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Make relfile tombstone files conditional on WAL level
Next
From: "Bossart, Nathan"
Date:
Subject: Re: Pre-allocating WAL files