From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Yaroslav Tykhiy <yar(at)barnet(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | vinny <vinny(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: R: Field's position in Table |
Date: | 2009-08-21 01:50:14 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10908201850q2feeb257h209be513e2179f3f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Yaroslav Tykhiy<yar(at)barnet(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> On 20/08/2009, at 7:24 PM, vinny wrote:
>
>> I can't really think of any real reason to put the field at a particular
>> position, applications
>> don't reallty care about the order of fields.
>
> ... unless an application is brain-damaged by its using a wildcard select,
> which is a well-known no-no even for home-made scripts, as it has already
> been pointed out here. My point here being that applications' robustness to
> apparent field order, like liberty, shouldn't be taken for granted: it needs
> to be explicitly minded, protected and sometimes fought for. :-)
And if you're going to write some simplified application that depends
on column order, then you should be willing to accept the
responsibility of maintain that order. I don't want or need such code
in pgsql really, so would rather not have someone playing with the
guts in pgsql to make this happen and breaking anything else. And it
IS non-trivial to implement in pgsql
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Clemens Schwaighofer | 2009-08-21 02:01:44 | Re: Postgre RAISE NOTICE and PHP |
Previous Message | Yaroslav Tykhiy | 2009-08-21 01:45:12 | Re: R: Field's position in Table |