On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 05:06:53PM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: > > 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.
Huh? If I have an index on the first two columns of a table, it's going to refernce columns 1 and 2. If you alter the table to put a column in front of those two, the new column will be physical 3, logical 1. If the index references logical numbers, the index has just been broken. If the index references physical numbers, everything works without changes. Same with views, if you use logical numbers you have to rebuild the view each time. Why bother, when physical numbers work and don't have that problem? Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <email@example.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to > litigate.
Description: Digital signature