From: | Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Ernest E Vogelsinger <ernest(at)vogelsinger(dot)at>, "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>, Sven Köhler <skoehler(at)upb(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: full featured alter table? |
Date: | 2003-06-15 22:43:32 |
Message-ID: | 3EECF694.4070206@wildenhain.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
Tom Lane wrote:
...
> The trouble with that rationale is that if you are using several
> different tools, you'd probably like them to agree on what the column
> ordering is. If the tools all have to invent their own private storage
> methods for ordering info, this will never happen.
...
> Finally, no tool can affect the behavior of "SELECT *" or INSERT-without-
> a-column-list, if there's no support for it in the database. Whatever
> your opinions on the safety of using these constructs in application
> code, people do use 'em a lot in hand-typed SQL. If these constructs
> do not follow the column order that a user is used to seeing in his
> admin tool, you are opening yourself up to problems.
...
why not just order the output columns in alphabetical order?
This is quite easy to implement and requires no additional
storage. The output would be the same all the time
and with all tools.
People again should be warned to use select *
in applications, but this is another thing...
Just my 0.02c
Regards
Tino
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2003-06-15 22:52:29 | Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 and KOI8 mini-howto |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-15 22:36:57 | Re: Why can't you define a table alias on an update? |