Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C469FB33F for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:08:26 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08999-04 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:08:22 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29EEA9FB321 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:08:23 -0400 (AST) Received: from [194.25.154.138] (helo=webserv.wug.de) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu5) with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0ML25U-1HM2422NE1-0002vg; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:08:19 +0100 Received: from kretschmer by webserv.wug.de with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1HM241-0006xP-00 for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:08:17 +0100 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:08:17 +0100 From: "A. Kretschmer" To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Position of a field Message-ID: <20070227130817.GF14945@a-kretschmer.de> References: <55c095e90702270351j7ee26c13o1a13f2a6c6b48eaf@mail.gmail.com> <20070227121737.GD14945@a-kretschmer.de> <55c095e90702270448p604c906flc5203315f4acdb48@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55c095e90702270448p604c906flc5203315f4acdb48@mail.gmail.com> X-OS: Debian/GNU Linux - weil ich es mir Wert bin! X-Message-Flag: "Windows" is not the answer. "Windows" is the question and the answer is "no"! User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:51ea9561fc3f6d9539a2acd743e4748c X-Provags-ID2: V01U2FsdGVkX1+Stf4DuuPX9C4Wbm+8esjWTCSa0iOckrmT4u0 RvOxuOdUfPi8xjUKV2l20BLIL/lpJt066BtXRhNbmssFqACLHK RUtBRcqmbKlfL8bd1xpnS2MvUTBwNl2 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.338 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, BAYES_50, SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200702/280 X-Sequence-Number: 27614 am Tue, dem 27.02.2007, um 9:48:57 -0300 mailte Ezequias Rodrigues da Rocha folgendes: > I understant you inquiry but I don't meant to add all the fields order > in an insert statement. > > IE: > insert into table values (value1, value2, value3....) > > is better than > > insert into table (column1,column2,column3 ...) values (value1, > value2, value3....) No, it isn't better, because, if you change the table in the future and add new colums, your insert-statement will be failed. If you write your insert with explicit column order, nothing happens, except the new row will be empty. Andreas -- Andreas Kretschmer Kontakt: Heynitz: 035242/47150, D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr: -> Header) GnuPG-ID: 0x3FFF606C, privat 0x7F4584DA http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net