| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| Date: | 2006-12-20 14:27:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20061220142713.GH24675@kenobi.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
* Andrew Dunstan (andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net) wrote:
> This isn't really a compromise. Remember that this discussion started
> with consideration of optimal record layout (minimising space use by
> reducing or eliminating alignment padding). The above proposal really
> does nothing for that.
While I agree that's how the discussion started the column ordering
issue can stand on its own and any proposal which provides that feature
should be considered. I don't think we should throw out the
rewrite-the-table idea because it doesn't solve other problems.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2006-12-20 14:35:53 | Re: Bundle of patches |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-12-20 14:19:12 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2006-12-20 14:35:53 | Re: Bundle of patches |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-12-20 14:19:12 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |