Programming

17507 readers

9 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

snowe

Ategon

[email protected]

121

You might as well timestamp it (changelog.com)

submitted 1 year ago by jerodsanto to c/programming

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Only really makes any sense for flags that go from false to true and don't go back often. And even then it has huge semantic cost. How do you distinguish a "boolean timestamp" from an actual timestamp? Is "modified at" a flag indicating a pending modification or a timestamp when it was last modified?

Much better to just have two columns, so e.g. you can see "enabled" and an 'enabled_date" that indicates when you last enabled/disabled the entity.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Much better to just have two columns, so e.g. you can see “enabled” and an 'enabled_date" that indicates when you last enabled/disabled the entity.

That sounds good until you realize you now have two sources of truth, do you trust enabled or enabled_date? If you really want to go this route enabled should be a virtual field that checks enabled_date in the background so you can have the boolean semantics but still keep a single field.

I also used booleans a lot previously but since using Laravel I have come to enjoy the updated_at, created_at and deleted_at fields that it automatically creates and I follow this format as well now if I need more.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But if it can be disabled we'd also need a disabled_date, however this implies that the state can switch from enabled to disabled and vice versa an infinite number of time, so we should create n*2 fields (enabled_date_1, disabled_date_1, ..., enabled_date_n, disabled_date_n) where n is the maximum amount of state switches/2. Of course we'll have to implement stream logging of events into a database, or at least some sort of counter, to determine the value of n, and then dynamically create new fields as needed.

Problem solved!

[–] towerful 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think having an enabled_at field as nullable timestamp is enough.
If it's present, it's enabled. If it's null, it's disabled.
It's a Boolean with context.

If you really need to track the history of a record being enabled/disabled, I'd suggest this should be in another table. With postgres (not sure if it's all DBs) you could create a trigger that when a record's enabled_at field is updated, it creates a record in the log table with a from state, a to state, a timestamp, even a role/user.

That way, you could then extract the history of that record if required.
Tbh, if using postgres, you could just make a logging table that stores a JSON of the entire old record, and a JSON of the entire new record.
Would let you rewind the history of a record, see who did what, etc.

Saves having an enabled and an enabled_at where there are potentially multiple sources of truth, or faffing around with arrays, multiple fields, over-pulling data

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yes my comment was definitely just a joke lol