Excerpts from Stephen Frost's message of jue may 19 13:49:33 -0400 2011: > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@commandprompt.com) wrote: > > Excerpts from Greg Stark's message of jue may 19 12:11:29 -0400 2011: > > > Adding such a feature would be pretty trivial, attached is a patch. > > > > Interesting, but not so trivial I think -- I mean if you're doing this I > > think you should add a column with the nominal position of the column in > > the table, so that it enables you to find it quickly in the other sort > > order. > > Afraid that I have to disagree.. The attnum (or, really, worse, since > you'd have to actually count/number the non-dropped columns only..) > doesn't strike me as being useful to the user for much of anything, > especially since we don't have the number anywhere in the default > listing.
Well, counting is not that hard (I mean if there's more than a screenful, just watch the pager). But yeah, it's not the attnum. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
