| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Robert Treat" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| Date: | 2006-12-21 16:06:53 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA57901A34ECC@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> > I don't think we should expose the offset to user view at all - this
is
> > just for internal use, no?
>
> The thing is, physical index numbers has meaning, the logical index
> number does not. In a view definition we're going to store the
physical
> index, not the logical one, for example. We don't want rearranging
> columns to invalidate view definitions or plans.
I think we lack a definition here:
logical number: the order of columns when doing select *
physical number: the position inside the heap tuple (maybe with
offset)
All views and plans and index definitions and most everyting else
needs to reference the logical number.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-12-21 16:07:20 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-12-21 16:05:16 | pgsql: Initial SQL/XML support: xml data type and initial set of |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-12-21 16:07:20 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-21 15:50:59 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |