| From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Don Baccus" <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
| Subject: | RE: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping |
| Date: | 2000-01-25 06:46:43 |
| Message-ID: | 001301bf66ff$f0d8d8e0$2801007e@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
>
> robustness of heap_getattr(). I have always wondered whether it works
> if you ADD COLUMN a 33'rd column (or anything that is just past the
> next padding boundary for the null-values bitmap).
>
If so,it's very serious.
ADD COLUMN feature is much more important than other ALTER TABLE
options and it's also important to implement it without touching the table
as possible.
It seems to me that each tuple has t_natts and t_hoff for the change of
table definition.
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-01-25 06:50:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping |
| Previous Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-01-25 06:39:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping |