Re: ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN ... SET DISTINCT
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN ... SET DISTINCT |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 603c8f070905050916w7a008053g1fa48e295e712fd4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN ... SET DISTINCT (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap@gmail.com> wrote: >>> A question: why does attdistinct become entry #5 instead of going at the end? >>> I assume it's because the order here controls the column order, and it makes >>> sense to have attdistinct next to attstattarget, since they're related. Is >>> that right? Thanks in advance... > >> Yep, that was my thought. > > We generally want fixed-size columns before variable-size ones, to ease > accessing them from C code. So it shouldn't go at the end in any case. > Beyond that it's mostly aesthetics, with maybe some thought for avoiding > unnecessary alignment padding. I thought about that as well; it should be OK where it is, in that regard. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: