Dave Cramer wrote:
>Andreas,
>
>The point of this is to maintain the column position. I don't think that
>an alter of a column type should move the column position.
>
Why should ALTER COLUMN change the column number, i.e. position?
>It may be that programmers should not rely on this, but it happens, and in very
>large projects. If we can avoid unexpected side-affects like moving the
>columns position, then I think we should.
>
>
This is *expected* if behaviour if you delete and add columns; is there
any DB system out there that allows to reshuffle the column ordering?
Instead of some order-ordering facility it would be better to support
all kinds of column type changes, not only binary compatible ones. This
would help everybody, not only maintainers of ill-designed software.
Regards,
Andreas
