| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE modifications |
| Date: | 2003-11-15 03:21:18 |
| Message-ID: | 3FB59BAE.8090507@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> This is expected. Doing otherwise would incur into a much bigger
> performance hit.
>
> Anyway, IMHO no code should use SELECT * in any case, which is the only
> scenario where one would expect physical column order to matter, isn't
> it?
Well, we can always bring back the old idea of a attlognum which is the
logical order of the columns. Then we use that to expand *
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-11-15 03:38:18 | Re: ALTER TABLE modifications |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-11-15 03:03:19 | Re: oh dear ... |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-11-15 03:38:18 | Re: ALTER TABLE modifications |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-11-14 23:52:14 | Re: update for brazilian portuguese translation |