Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDE25475F2C for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:39:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from opal.albourne.com (opal.albourne.com [195.212.241.228]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D34F475AD7 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:39:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from emily.cy.albourne.com (emily.cy.albourne.com [192.168.51.32]) by opal.albourne.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/Albourne/R/1.15) with ESMTP id QAA26694 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:39:37 +0300 Received: from iris (alessio@iris.cy.albourne.com [192.168.51.67]) by emily.cy.albourne.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/Albourne/S/1.8) with ESMTP id QAA27746 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:39:37 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: Re: Changing Column Order (Was Re: MySQL vs PostgreSQL.) From: Alessio Bragadini To: PostgreSQL Hackers In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 14 Oct 2002 16:39:37 +0300 Message-Id: <1034602777.6205.203.camel@iris> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200210/620 X-Sequence-Number: 30389 On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 11:37, Gavin Sherry wrote: > I cannot think of any reason why changing column order should be > implemented in Postgres. Seems like a waste of time/more code bloat for > something which is strictly asthetic. > > Regardless, I do have collegues/clients who ask when such a feature will > be implemented. Why is this useful? Has column ordering any effect on the physical tuple disposition? I've heard discussions about keeping fixed-size fields at the beginning of the tuple and similar. Sorry for the lame question. :-) -- Alessio F. Bragadini alessio@albourne.com APL Financial Services http://village.albourne.com Nicosia, Cyprus phone: +357-22-755750 "It is more complicated than you think" -- The Eighth Networking Truth from RFC 1925