From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
Date: | 2006-12-21 16:27:44 |
Message-ID: | 458AB600.7060401@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 10:50:59AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Really? To me that's one of a large number of questions that are
>>> unresolved about how we'd do this. You can make a case for either
>>> choice in quite a number of places.
>>>
>
>
>> Can we? For anything of any permenence (view definitions, rules,
>> compiled functions, plans, etc) you're going to want the physical
>> number, for the same reason we store the oids of functions and tables.
>>
>
> Not if we intend to rearrange the physical numbers during column
> add/drop to provide better packing.
>
> You could make a case that we need *three* numbers: a permanent column
> ID, a display position, and a storage position.
>
>
>
Could this not be handled by some catalog fixup after an add/drop? If we
get the having 3 numbers you will almost have me convinced that this
might be too complicated after all.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-21 16:30:27 | Re: Stats Collector Oddity |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2006-12-21 16:26:30 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-21 16:43:27 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2006-12-21 16:26:30 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch |