Re: dblink_build_sql_update versus dropped columns

On 06/14/2010 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>> I didn't even think people were using those functions for many years
>> since I never heard any complaints. I'd say better to not backpatch
>> changes to logical ordering, but FWIW the attached at least fixes the
>> immediate bug in head and ought to work at least a few branches.
>
> [squint...] This doesn't appear to me to fix the problem. You really
> need the query-construction loops to track logical and physical numbers
> separately.

Hmmm, worked for the provided case, but this is a good example of why I
*usually* don't send a patch to the list without spending more quality
time thinking about the problem ;-)

Joe