On 24/10/2019 16:54, Surafel Temesgen wrote: > > hi Vik, > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 9:02 PM Vik Fearing > <vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com <mailto:vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote: > > > > If we're going to be implicitly adding stuff to the PK, we also > need to > add that stuff to the other unique constraints, no? And I think it > would be better to add both the start and the end column to these > keys. > Most of the temporal queries will be accessing both. > > > yes it have to be added to other constraint too but adding both system > time > to PK will violate constraint because it allow multiple data in > current data
I don't understand what you mean by this. > > > > Why aren't you following the standard syntax here? > > > > because we do have TIME and SYSTEM_P as a key word and am not sure of > whether > its a right thing to add other keyword that contain those two word > concatenated Yes, we have to do that. > > > > > Any enlightenment? > > > > There are quite a lot of typos and other things that aren't > written "the > Postgres way". But before I comment on any of that, I'd like to > see the > features be implemented correctly according to the SQL standard. > > > it is almost in sql standard syntax except the above small difference. > i can correct it > and post more complete patch soon. I don't mean just the SQL syntax, I also mean the behavior.
