From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Lukas Kahwe Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Simple Column reordering |
Date: | 2007-02-23 22:27:15 |
Message-ID: | 200702232227.l1NMRF526448@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > If this is standards-breaking as you say, I would withdraw immediately.
> > I checked the SQL standard and could not see how this would do so. The
> > standard states SELECT * would return columns in order; it doesn't say
> > what that order should be, nor does CREATE TABLE enforce the ordering to
> > be the same as it has specified, AFAICS. Please correct me and I will
> > withdraw. Practical issues seem far stronger drivers than standards
> > issues here, which is why the parameter would default=off.
>
> I did not follow the entire thread. I just wanted to point out that IIRC
> MS SQL Server (and maybe also Sybase) do automatically optimize the
> internal order of how columns are stored to move fixed length (which
> also means non NULLable for these two servers) columns to the left.
> Maybe this will serve as a reference point (not necessarily for
> standards compliance of course).
And that optimized ordering shows up with SELECT *?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2007-02-23 22:27:46 | Re: SCMS question |
Previous Message | Ron Mayer | 2007-02-23 22:15:56 | Re: Priorities for users or queries? |