On 12/24/19 8:44 AM, Ron wrote:
> On 12/24/19 10:39 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 12/23/19 6:14 PM, Ron wrote:
>>> On 12/23/19 7:01 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>>> Is this something that has been considered for implementation?
>>>> I wrote a blog about this:
>>>>
>>>> https://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2017.html#November_21_2017
>>>
>>> You all are *grossly* over-complicating this.
>>
>> Not really. This discussion has come up before and it starts with the
>> simple case of timestamp the initial CREATE. This would suffice for
>> some folks. However, it then progresses into a request for full object
>> audit system.
>
> This is directly akin to Henry Ford refusing to build cars because
> people will *someday*** want computerized fuel injection, crumple zones
> and air bags.
No it is following this:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/26/
and this:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20191223051726.GA30778%40fetter.org
and understanding there are finite resources and that not everything is
going to get done and that choices have to be made. Given that there are
alternatives available I can see why this choice does not rise to the
level of imminent action.
>
>> I understand why there is no great desire to start down this path by
>> the developers, they know the pressure would be on to expand the code.
>> As Fabrízio mentions in another post this is something that could be
>> covered in an extension. FYI, I do it by using Sqitch for my schema
>> object creation.
>>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com