Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"

From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"
Date: 2013-01-03 04:08:26
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I know this has been discussed and rejected before, but I find that
> rejection to be wrong-headed.  I have repeatedly been asked, with
> levels of exasperation ranging from mild to homicidal, why we don't
> have this feature, and I have no good answer.  If it were somehow
> difficult to record this or likely to produce a lot of overhead, that
> would be one thing.  But it isn't.  It's probably a hundred-line
> patch, and AFAICS the overhead would be miniscule.

Hi all,

The attached patch add a new column into 'pg_database' called 'datcreated'
to store the timestamp of database creation.

If this feature is approved I could extend it to add a column into
'pg_class' to store creation timestamp too.

I think we can discuss about psql support to show this new info about


Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Blog sobre TI:
>> Perfil Linkedin:
>> Twitter:

Attachment: pg_database_add_datcreated_column_v1.patch
Description: application/octet-stream (5.6 KB)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2013-01-03 04:34:36
Subject: Re: Problematic dependency in plpython Makefile [Windows]
Previous:From: Noah MischDate: 2013-01-03 04:08:00
Subject: Re: Problematic dependency in plpython Makefile [Windows]

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group