> > We could name the fields "________dropped_x" sort of thing perhaps????
>
> In practice that would certainly work, especially if we increase
> NAMEDATALEN to 128 or so, as has been proposed repeatedly.
Well, x is just an integer anyway, so even with 32 it's not a problem...
In case anyone was wondering btw, if a column named 'dropped_1' already
exists when you drop column 1 in the table, it will be renamed like this:
dropped1_1
And if that also exists, it will become
dropped2_1
etc. I put that extra number after dropped and not at the end so prevent it
being off the end of a 32 character name.
> Alternatively, we could invest a lot of work to make it possible for
> attname to be NULL, but I don't see the payoff...
Yeah, I think a weird name should be good enough...
Chris