Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> No, he only breaks even for client cleanliness --- either approach
> >> *will* require changes in clients that look at pg_attribute.
>
> > Uh, Christopher already indicated three clients, psql, pg_dump, and
> > another that will not require changes for Hiroshi's approach, but will
> > require changes for isdropped.
>
> Oh? If either psql or pg_dump don't break, it's a mere coincidence,
> because they certainly depend on attnum. (It's also pretty much
> irrelevant considering they're both under our control and hence easily
> fixed.)
>
> I'm fairly certain that Christopher is mistaken, anyhow. Check the
> manipulations of attribute defaults for a counterexample in pg_dump.
Well, it seems isdropped is going to have to be checked by _any_ client,
while holes in the number will have to be checked by _some_ clients. Is
that accurate?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026