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

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2
Date
Msg-id 458AA7D0.1020802@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2  ("Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
Responses Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2
List pgsql-hackers
Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
>> I'm not sure how much you can do with typing. Things like heap_getattr
>> are macros, and thus untyped. Most places use attr as an index to an
>> array, which also can't be type checked.
>>
>> If you switched everything over to inline functions you might 
>> get it to
>> work, but that's about it.
>>
>> IMHO the best solution is to offset the logical numbers by some
>> constant...
>>     
>
> Um, surely you meant "offset the physical numbers". Imho the logical
> numbers
> need to stay 1-n, because those numbers are used way more often and are 
> more user visible than the physical.
>
>
>   

I don't think we should expose the offset to user view at all - this is 
just for internal use, no?

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: log_min_error_statement and parameters value
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ERROR: tuple concurrently updated