Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN
Date: 2002-07-04 06:06:04
Message-ID: 200207040606.g64664P03984@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Actually, your trial required column dropped-ness to be checked in
> >> many more places than the proposed approach does.
>
> > Have you ever really checked my trial implementation ?
>
> Well, I've certainly stumbled over it in places like relcache.c
> and preptlist.c, which IMHO should not have to know about this...
> and I have little confidence that there are not more places that
> would have needed fixes if the change had gotten any wide use.
> You were essentially assuming that it was okay for pg_attribute.attnum
> to not agree with indexes into tuple descriptors, which seems very
> shaky to me.

Isn't it only the dropped column that doesn't agree with the descriptor.
The kept columns retain the same numbering, and a NULL sits in the
dropped spot, right?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-07-04 06:11:13 Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-07-04 06:02:31 Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN