X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E02A534B2 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:19:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07008-01 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:19:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from boutiquenumerique.com (boutiquenumerique.com [82.67.9.10]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170DA534AC for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:19:30 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 25271 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2005 16:19:46 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (boutiquenumerique-lists@192.168.0.4) by boutiquenumerique.com with SMTP; 30 Mar 2005 16:19:46 +0200 Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:19:29 +0200 To: lucas@presserv.org, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: New record position References: <20050330105017.miuieky7u64gscgc@www.presserv.org> From: PFC Organization: =?iso-8859-15?Q?La_Boutique_Num=E9rique?= Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-15 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20050330105017.miuieky7u64gscgc@www.presserv.org> User-Agent: Opera M2(BETA2)/8.0 (Linux, build 987) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.003 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200503/389 X-Sequence-Number: 20868 > Why it? I can't undestand why the new record location was change. > Shouldn't it > apper at the LAST record??? > What need I do?? > Thank you. The SQL spec specifies that if you don't use ORDER BY, well, the records come out in any order they want. Actually it's the order they are on disk, which is more or less random as inserting new records will fill the space left by deleted ones, and vacuum full will compact them. If you want order, use ORDER BY. If you want to order them in the order they were inserted, order by a SERIAL PRIMARY KEY field...