4 ms·
This sounds like temporal tables, does it not - except deep inside the storage engine?? The historical copy goes to a separate table, the current row is in the
by sixdimensional 6y ago
This sounds like temporal tables, does it not - except deep inside the storage engine?? The historical copy goes to a separate table, the current row is in the current table.
I wonder if there is a logical overlap in the ideas between temporal table handling and this low level storage engine optimization.
- jacques_chester 6y agoPostgreSQL used to have a limited form of unitemporalism by exploiting its MVCC implementation. You could retrieve unvacuumed rows through some additional magic. For true bitemporalism you need more than current-row/historical-row separations, though.
- atombender 6y agoIndeed, Postgres used to have "time travel" [1] — allowing you to view the table as it was a given point in time. It was removed in 6.2, though some of Of course, support doesn't require Postgres-style MVCC. Oracle has time travel, which it calls Flashback ("SELECT AS OF"), even though it uses a different type of concurrency control. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/6.3/c0503.htm https://www.postgresql.org/docs/6.3/c0503.htm