Simon Riggs wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I realized this proposal has been withdrawn, but the fact the proposal > > even illicited comments exploring it requires me to comment. > > > > Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and > > no-column-list INSERTs for a small performance boost? If there was no > > other way to get the performance boost, and the features was rarely > > used, we might consider such a change, but neither is true in this case. > > > > My point is that this proposal is so far away from our acceptable > > criteria that I am worried about how people are analyzing proposals. > > When suggested, it wasn't clear to me that it did break anything, > otherwise I wouldn't have written it up. I read Alvaro's post and
You mentioned in your own original posting that it broke SELECT * and COPY. > wondered why that proposal had been overlooked, so I started a separate > thread to ensure that the idea was discussed. That seems very similar to > many of your own posts. True, but usually I don't see the breakage. What concerned me is you saw some of the breakage, but still went ahead with the proposal. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match