From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Konstantin Izmailov <pgfizm(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_attribute.attnum - wrong column ordinal? |
Date: | 2009-12-03 15:09:17 |
Message-ID: | 8576.1259852957@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Should we recast the attributes and columns views in information_schema?
> I notice they still use attnum.
I'd vote against it, at least until we have something better than a
row_number solution. That would create another huge performance penalty
on views that are already ungodly slow.
When and if we get around to separating physical from logical column
position, the issue might go away "for free".
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2009-12-03 15:42:58 | Re: Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-03 15:03:10 | Re: numeric cast oddity |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2009-12-03 15:42:58 | Re: Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4 |
Previous Message | Eitan Talmi | 2009-12-03 14:48:59 | Re: [Bacula-users] Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4 |