[HACKERS] "SELECT *" vs hidden columns and logical column order - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject [HACKERS] "SELECT *" vs hidden columns and logical column order
Date
Msg-id CAEepm=3ZHh=p0nEEnVbs1Dig_UShPzHUcMNAqvDQUgYgcDo-pA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: [HACKERS] "SELECT *" vs hidden columns and logical column order
Re: [HACKERS] "SELECT *" vs hidden columns and logical column order
List pgsql-hackers
Hi hackers,

I am aware of at three potential projects that would change the
meaning of "SELECT *":

1.  Incremental MATERIALIZED VIEW maintenance probably needs to be
able to use a hidden counter column which you can ask for by name but
will otherwise not show up to users:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1371480075.55528.YahooMailNeo@web162901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

2.  SQL:2011 temporal tables track system time and/or valid time with
columns that users create and then declare to be temporal control
columns.  I don't think they show up unless you name them directly (I
didn't check the standard but I noticed that it's that way in another
product), so I guess that's basically the same as (1).

3.  Logical column order aka ALTER COLUMN POSITION, a recurring topic
on pgsql-hackers for which patches have been written but nothing has
so far managed to stick:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20141209174146.GP1768%40alvh.no-ip.org

Suppose someone wanted to chip away at a small piece of incremental
matviews by inventing a way to declare 'hidden' columns: is there
really a dependency here as implied in the 2013 email above?  Is
anyone planning to revive logical column order?

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Mengxing Liu"
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] [GSOC][weekly report 4] Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflicttracking in serializable transactions
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: protocol version negotiation (Re: [HACKERS] Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH- version compatibility)