Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6388C476F14; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:27:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megazone.bigpanda.com (megazone.bigpanda.com [63.150.15.178])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9A1254758F1; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:27:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 505EAD618; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:27:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4610D5C02; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:27:02 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:27:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
To: Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan@nsd.ca>
Cc: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>,
	<pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: CLUSTER command
In-Reply-To: <3DF90A89.61040846@nsd.ca>
Message-ID: <20021212142547.J12742-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517
X-Archive-Number: 200212/672
X-Sequence-Number: 34587

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote:

> The current cluster command is equivalant to:
>
> create b as select * from a order by i;
>
> So you would not be loosing anything.

Except for the fact that the CLUSTER is intended (although
I don't know if it does yet) to retain things like constraints
and other indexes which the above doesn't.