| From: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Joost Kraaijeveld <J(dot)Kraaijeveld(at)Askesis(dot)nl>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Top 10 Wishlist |
| Date: | 2006-01-19 00:34:52 |
| Message-ID: | 1461BDB4-06AD-48F5-8BD3-028F6E71C564@myrealbox.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Jan 19, 2006, at 9:10 , Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> It would definately be nice if the end-user concept of column order
> wasn't tied to the physical order in the database.
Tom Lane has mentioned at least a couple of times that decoupling the
(SQL-required) logical order from the physical order is probably
pretty hairy and would lead to easy to make and hard to track down
bugs and I don't doubt that it's pretty detailed and complicated
work. If someone were so inclined, they could probably look into this
more closely and see what it would take to create a clean, easy-to-
use and easy-to-maintain interface between the physical and logical
data representation (including column order).
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Crozier | 2006-01-19 00:38:40 | Re: RAID-50 |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2006-01-19 00:33:23 | Re: PostgreSQL Top 10 Wishlist |