| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Phil Currier" <pcurrier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Column storage positions |
| Date: | 2007-02-22 16:30:24 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA57901CAF70E@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > In any case I think it's foolish not to tackle both issues at once.
> > We know we'd like to have both features and we know that
> all the same
> > bits of code need to be looked at to implement either.
>
> I guess I disagree with that sentiment. I don't think it's
> necessary to bundle these two features together, even if some
> analysis will be duplicated between them, since they are
> completely distinct in a functional sense and will touch
> different places in the code.
I fully agree with Phil here.
And I also see a lot of unhappiness from users of system tables
when column numbers all over the system tables would not be logical
column
positions any more.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2007-02-22 16:38:26 | Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD | 2007-02-22 16:22:34 | Re: HOT for PostgreSQL 8.3 |