Re: logical column ordering

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > However, there's a difference between making a query silently given
> > different results, and breaking it completely forcing the user to
> > re-study how to write it. I think the latter is better. In that light
> > we should just drop attnum as a column name, and use something else:
> > maybe (attidnum, attlognum, attphysnum). So all queries in the wild
> > would be forced to be updated, but we would not silently change
> > semantics instead.
>
> +1 for that approach. Much better to break all of the third-party
> code out there definitively than to bet on which attribute people are
> going to want to use most commonly.
>
> I'm a little confused as to the status of this patch. It's marked as
> Waiting on Author in the CommitFest application, and the last patch
> version was posted in December.

There was a patch here, which in the commit fest is "hidden" behind other
non-attachments in the same email:

Attachment (randomize.sql
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/37076/randomize.sql>)
at 2015-02-27
19:10:21
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/54F0C11D.7000906@2ndquadrant.com/> from
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra at 2ndquadrant.com>

But that patch failed the majority of "make check" checks in my hands. So
I also don't know what the status is.

Cheers,

Jeff