Re: PostgreSQL Top 10 Wishlist

From: Frank van Vugt <ftm(dot)van(dot)vugt(at)foxi(dot)nl>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Joost Kraaijeveld <J(dot)Kraaijeveld(at)askesis(dot)nl>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Top 10 Wishlist
Date: 2006-01-18 08:45:51
Message-ID: 200601180945.52183.ftm.van.vugt@foxi.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

L.S.

I was afraid something like this would happen ;)

Just to be clear on the matter, the wrong post was just part of a conversation
between the OP and I. We are not exactly strangers and there was no
intentional nor accidential bad advice intended ;)

For the record I'll repeat on the list that the OP should also note the
mailinglist archive on the matter (both the column position in a select as
well as fiddling with attnum), since the original discussion has been one
that repeated periodically.

> Just to avoid anyone getting strange ideas: editting the catalog
> manually has a 100% certainty of trashing any data in the table.

Well, a good chance, anyway ;)

> Also various things like indexes and foreign keys may use the attnum also
> and become non-functional

Absolutely true.

> It's entirely possible that on an empty table with nothing attached that
> changing attnum manually might work, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Me neither, since I haven't tried that in a while too (the OP was already
aware of this).

Anyway, it's just a good thing people are paying attention around here ;)

--
Best,

Frank.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Friedrich 2006-01-18 08:55:13 Partitioning: Planner makes no use of indexes on inherited table?!
Previous Message Joost Kraaijeveld 2006-01-18 08:42:36 Re: PostgreSQL Top 10 Wishlist