I’m partial to blue myself :p. David Cook Systems Librarian Prosentient Systems 72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007 From: Chris Cormack [mailto:chris@bigballofwax.co.nz] Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2014 2:59 PM To: David Cook Cc: koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] Ambiguous column names I think it should be yellow Chris On 13/11/2014 4:52 pm, "David Cook" <dcook@prosentient.com.au <mailto:dcook@prosentient.com.au> > wrote: Actually, after looking at the `issues` and `reserves` tables, I'm really in favour of getting rid of "timestamp" columns and renaming them more contextually. In the case of `reserves`, I have no idea what `timestamp` means. There's already `reservedate`, `notificationdate`, `reminderdate`, `waitingdate`. It's probably `updated` in that case? As `reservedate` would be `created`? In the case of `issues`, there is already `date_due`, `lastreneweddate`, `returndate`, `issuedate`. I imagine `issuedate` would be `created`. It looks like `timestamp` is `updated` . As I look, it usually matches `lastreneweddate` although timestamp has time while the other does not. I wonder how much we actually use `timestamp` in the code... Of course, if we do change column names, then we'll be screwing up a lot of the existing SQL reports that people have out there which may or may not use timestamp for dating... David Cook Systems Librarian Prosentient Systems 72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007
-----Original Message----- From: koha-devel-bounces@lists.koha-community.org <mailto:koha-devel-bounces@lists.koha-community.org> [mailto:koha-devel- <mailto:koha-devel-> bounces@lists.koha-community.org <mailto:bounces@lists.koha-community.org> ] On Behalf Of Robin Sheat Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2014 1:03 PM To: koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org <mailto:koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org> Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] Ambiguous column names
David Cook schreef op do 13-11-2014 om 12:12 [+1100]:
I think the best option, if we were to change away from timestamp, would have to be "lastmodified", as timestamp types will get updated after every insert/update, I believe. But since they'd all be called "lastmodified", changing it from "timestamp" would become a bit moot, I think.
Well, I was thinking both, "created" and "updated." So you know when the record was created, and when it was last changed. Both very handy for simple auditing or bug finding.
It's possible to have a timestamp field that is initialised to the current date automatically on creation, and another that is auto updated.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/timestamp-initialization.html
This would nicely mean that there's no code at all in Koha required to maintain this.
Anyway, I was just sticking my oar in, I've no desire to bikeshed it into the ground, anything is better than nothing :)
-- Robin Sheat Catalyst IT Ltd. ✆ +64 4 803 2204 <tel:%2B64%204%20803%202204> GPG: 5FA7 4B49 1E4D CAA4 4C38 8505 77F5 B724 F871 3BDF
_______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org <mailto:Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org> http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/