Hannu Krosing wrote: > > On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 09:11, Hiroshi Inoue wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > From my perspective, when client coders like Dave Page and others say > > > they would prefer the flag to the negative attno's, I don't have to > > > understand. I just take their word for it. > > > > do they really love to check attisdropped everywhere ? > > Isn't it the opposite of the encapsulation ? > > I don't understand why we would do nothing for clients. > > AFAIK, there is separate work being done on defining SQL99 compatible > system views, that most client apps could and should use. > > But those (few) apps that still need intimate knowledge about postrges' > internals will always have to query the original system _tables_. > > Also, as we have nothing like Oracles ROWNR, I think it will be quite > hard to have colnums without gaps in the system views,
Agreed. However do we have to give up all views which omit dropped columns ? > so we could > perhaps have a stopgap solution of adding logical column numbers ( > (pg_attribute.attlognum) that will be changed every time a col is > added/dropped just for that purpose. > > ------------- > Hannu -- Hiroshi Inoue http://w2422.nsk.ne.jp/~inoue/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster