Re: timestamp fields and order by?

Steve Wampler <swampler(at)noao(dot)edu> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Even so, though, I think it would be quite foolish to design an
>> application around the assumption that the timestamps of successive
>> insertions will be distinguishable. Put in a serial column.

> I'll do that. I was a bit surprised to see that the sort wasn't
> stable, however. Was that intentional for performance, or just
> not considered worth the effort?

I think our sort code isn't stable --- it's a quicksort which usually
isn't. But in any case the physical tuple locations aren't guaranteed
to be strictly increasing, so changing the sort code wouldn't make it
safe.

regards, tom lane