Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Treat
Subject Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2
Date
Msg-id 200612192235.22169.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Responses Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 11:25, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:48:41AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > Sure, but the only sane way I can think of to do that would be have
> > separate logical and physical orderings, with a map between the two. I
> > guess we'd need to see what the potential space savings would be and
> > establish what the processing overhead would be, before considering it.
> > One side advantage would be that it would allow us to do the often
> > requested "add column at position x".
>
> A patch to allow seperate physical and logical orderings was submitted
> and rejected. Unless something has changed on that front, any
> discussion in this direction isn't really useful.
>

The patch was rejected on technical means, and the author decided it was too 
much work to finish it.  If someone wanted to try and complete that work I 
don't think anyone would stand against it. 

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: Companies Contributing to Open Source
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Companies Contributing to Open Source