Re: Column reordering in pg_dump

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, hernan gonzalez <hgonzalez(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Column reordering in pg_dump
Date: 2008-11-26 00:30:34
Message-ID: 23035.1227659434@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 03:10:30PM -0600, Decibel! wrote:
>> IIRC the community did come to a consensus on allowing for a
>> different logical ordering from physical ordering, it was an issue of
>> actually doing the work. If this is an itch you want to scratch, you
>> might look into fixing that problem instead.

> Err, as I recall it was decided that the chance for confusion was too
> high.
> http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org/msg85548.html

That message was about an approach that didn't have consensus ;-)

The ultimate conclusion was that a three-way split (identity, logical
position, physical position) could work because most of the code only
cares about column identity; the places where logical or physical
positions are important are pretty narrowly circumscribed, or could
be made so.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-11-26 00:44:27 Re: Simple postgresql.conf wizard
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2008-11-26 00:00:45 Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)