Up! Anybody will answer about the patch?
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Oleg Serov <serovov@gmail.com> wrote:
> How about adding this patch to postgresql it will slove the problem?
>
> On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Greg Stark<gsstark@mit.edu> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> when i done dump->restore i
> >>> have surprise,
> >>> Column ordering was changed.
> >>
> >> This is not a bug, it's the intended behavior.
> >
> > I thought that was a bug, just one that was too hard to fix for the
> > problems it caused. It might be more fixable if we get around to the
> > work that was discussed earlier where we separate attnum into three
> > different values.
> >
> > Oleg: note that having the columns in the same position allows some
> > optimizations in the executor so it's probably a good thing if it
> > hasn't broken your application.
> >
> > --
> > greg
> > http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf<http://mit.edu/%7Egsstark/resume.pdf>
> >
>
--=20
=F3 =D5=D7=C1=D6=C5=CE=C9=C5=CD
=EF=CC=C5=C7 =F3=C5=D2=CF=D7
