From: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | Phil Currier <pcurrier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Column storage positions |
Date: | 2007-02-21 17:17:30 |
Message-ID: | 45DC7EAA.3080002@phlo.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 03:59:12PM +0100, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
>> I think you'd want to have a flag per field that tell you if the user
>> has overridden the storage pos for that specific field. Otherwise,
>> the next time you have to chance to optimize the ordering, you might
>> throw away changes that the admin has done on purpose.
>
> Why would you want to let the admin have any say at all about the
> storage order?
It wasn't my idea - the OP proposed a "alter table <table> alter column
<col> set storage position <pos>" command. But if you're gonna decouple
the storage order from the attnum, they why don't let the dba tweak it?
Since you have at least two possible optimization speeds - for size, or
for fast access to specifc fields, creating a one-size-fits-all ordering
rule seems hard...
greetings, Florian Pflug
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2007-02-21 17:20:19 | Re: Column storage positions |
Previous Message | Phil Currier | 2007-02-21 17:06:30 | Re: Column storage positions |