X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D0A09FA5FB for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:34:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77427-06 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:34:43 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from wolff.to (wolff.to [66.93.197.194]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1099F9FA004 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:34:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail 23605 invoked by uid 500); 26 Jul 2006 20:39:54 -0000 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:39:54 -0500 From: Bruno Wolff III To: Michael Artz Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Storing an ordered list Message-ID: <20060726203954.GA23437@wolff.to> Mail-Followup-To: Bruno Wolff III , Michael Artz , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.014 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200607/322 X-Sequence-Number: 25896 On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 22:58:47 -0400, Michael Artz wrote: > > I figure that one choice is to explicitly code the order as an integer > column in the predicate table which has the advantage of being very > easy and fast to query/order but *very* slow to reorder as all of the > predicates need to be updated. This would seem to be a postgres/MVCC > weak spot as well. Example: If you use numeric instead of int, then it is easy to insert new values.