| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Jon Jensen <jon(at)endpoint(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: logical column position |
| Date: | 2003-11-21 16:08:42 |
| Message-ID: | 12668.1069430922@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> Maybe my proposal wasn't clear enough:
> Just as an index references a pg_class entry by it's OID, not some value
> identifying it's physical storage, all objects might continue
> referencing columns by attnum.
That's exactly the same thing I am saying. Your mistake is to assume
that this function can be combined with identification of a (changeable)
logical column position. It can't. Changeability and immutability are
just not compatible requirements.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-21 16:28:17 | Re: Transaction Rollback problen (3.0 Protocol) |
| Previous Message | Tim Farrell | 2003-11-21 16:07:47 | Can't initdb, libdir points to static location |