Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > I propose that at CREATE TABLE time, the column ordering is re-ordered
> > so that the table columns are packed more efficiently. This would be a
> > physical re-ordering, so that SELECT * and COPY without explicit column
> > definitions would differ from the original CREATE TABLE statement.
> >
> > This would be an optional feature, off by default, controlled by a
> >     optimize_column_order = off (default) | on
> Umm, you want a GUC setting to enable standards-breaking behaviour and
> that will be obsolete when we do column ordering right, which is not
> likely to be more than one release away, and could even still happen in
> this coming release?

Given that we already seem to have a patch implementing a complete
solution, or part thereof, this would seem a rather shortsighted
proposal.  Why not develop the whole thing and be done with it?

I don't understand the reluctance to implementing all of it.  The most
serious objection I've seen, from Andreas IIRC, is that it would make
drivers' lives more difficult; but really, drivers have to cope with
dropped columns today which is a pain, and ISTM this proposal (not this
one here, but the three-column proposal) would make that a bit simpler.

Alvaro Herrera                      
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to