| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Holger Jakobs <holger(at)jakobs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Wells Oliver <wells(dot)oliver(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re-order columns? |
| Date: | 2020-07-29 21:11:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZ2vivP9F4PveTsGXtJ61N5gKh5npo6OndgbWYpt-gXig@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020, David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 29, 2020, Holger Jakobs <holger(at)jakobs(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>
>> That columns appear to have some kind of order and show in tools with a
>> stable order has technical reasons and is not rooted in relational theory.
>>
>
> Technical reasons are real reasons. The order of columns is very real,
> guaranteed (beware of inherits), thing in PostgreSQL whereas there is no
> guarantee regarding row order outside of a select query order by. That
> said I do agree that fulfilling “ocd” drives isn’t a strong use case to
> work on the feature.
>
As for the theory, a tuple is an ordered list so the ordering of columns is
a precise application of that definition and a relation is just a set
(i.e., unordered) of tuples. So the claim this isn’t rooted in relational
theory just seems wrong.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Olivier Gautherot | 2020-07-29 21:18:10 | Re: Re-order columns? |
| Previous Message | Olivier Gautherot | 2020-07-29 21:10:29 | Re: Re-order columns? |