Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > > > Why ? As you already mentioned, there were not that many places
> > > > to be changed.
> > > >
> > > > Well what's changed since then ?
> > >
> > > Here is an old email from me that outlines the idea of having a
> > > physical/logical attribute numbering system, and the advantages.
> >
> > I already tried physical/logical attribute implementation
> > pretty long ago. Where are new ideas to solve the problems
> > that the approach has ?
>
> Good question. I am suggesting more than just the drop column fix. It
> could be used for smaller data files to reduce padding, fix for
> inheritance problems with ADD COLUMN, and performance of moving
> varlena's to the end of the row.
>
> Also, my idea was to have the physical/logical mapping happen closer to
> the client, so the backend mostly only deals with physical.
If the client has to bear the some part, isn't the invisible
column approach much simpler ?
I've put a pretty much time into DROP COLUMN feature but
I am really disappointed to see the comments in this thread.
What DROP COLUMN has brought me seems only a waste of time.
Possibly I must have introduced either implementation forcibly.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
