Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table

On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 11:04 PM Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 3:28 PM Li Japin <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 12:39 AM, Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 2:33 PM Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm still in the weeds of reviewing this patch, but why should this
>>> fail?  It should not fail.
>>
>>
>> Attached is rebased patch that include isolation test
>>
>>
>> Thanks for updating the patch.  However it cannot apply to master (e5d8a9990).
>>
>> Here are some comments on system-versioning-temporal-table_2021_v13.patch.
>>
>> +</programlisting>
>> +    When system versioning is specified two columns are added which
>> +    record the start timestamp and end timestamp of each row verson.
>>
>> verson -> version
>>
>> +    By default, the column names will be StartTime and EndTime, though
>> +    you can specify different names if you choose.
>>
>> In fact, it is start_time and end_time, not StartTime and EndTime.
>> I think it's better to use <literal> label around start_time and end_time.
>>
>> +    column will be automatically added to the Primary Key of the
>> +    table.
>>
>> Should we mention the unique constraints?
>>
>> +    The system versioning period end column will be added to the
>> +    Primary Key of the table as a way of ensuring that concurrent
>> +    INSERTs conflict correctly.
>>
>> Same as above.
>>
>> Since the get_row_start_time_col_name() and get_row_end_time_col_name()
>> are similar, IMO we can pass a flag to get StartTime/EndTime column name,
>> thought?
>>
>> --
>> Regrads,
>> Japin Li.
>> ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
>>
> The patch (system-versioning-temporal-table_2021_v13.patch) does not apply successfully.
>
> http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_32_2316.log
>
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 80.
> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/test/regress/parallel_schedule.rej
> patching file src/test/regress/serial_schedule
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 126 (offset -1 lines).
>
>
> Therefore it is a minor change so I rebased the patch, please take a look at that.

The patch does not apply on Head anymore, could you rebase and post a
patch. I'm changing the status to "Waiting for Author".

Regards,
Vignesh