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.
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 |