| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Error in ORDER BY on check constraints in psql |
| Date: | 2005-10-20 05:28:54 |
| Message-ID: | 43572B16.3020806@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches pgsql-ports |
> That was probably done deliberately, back in the day when constraints
> tended to have uselessly random names like "$1" --- sorting by the
> constraint text was more helpful. I agree that now sorting by name
> seems like the better thing.
Even in the "$x" case, it's better to have them sorted in that order
(ie. the order they were created...)
> I think there's nothing wrong with the "ORDER BY 1" part ... it's the
> fact that the columns are selected in a different order than they'll
> be used that seems bizarre to me. I fixed it like this instead.
Ah, the way that requires effort :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2005-10-20 05:49:47 | Re: [PATCHES] Caveat for Domains |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-20 05:19:15 | Re: Error in ORDER BY on check constraints in psql |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Browne | 2005-10-20 16:27:41 | AIX FAQ update for 5.3 socket address size issue |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-20 05:19:15 | Re: Error in ORDER BY on check constraints in psql |