Re: pg_attribute.attnum - wrong column ordinal?

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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