On Mon, Apr 2, 2007 at 2:44 AM, Phil Currier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/1/07, Guillaume Smet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Phil, did you make any progress with your patch? Your results seemed > > very encouraging and your implementation interesting. > > IIRC, the problem was that you weren't interested in working on the > > "visual/mysqlish" column ordering. As the plan was to decouple column > > ordering in three different orderings, I don't think it's really a > > problem if your implementation doesn't support one of them (at least > > if it doesn't prevent us from having the visual one someday). > > > > I haven't done much with it since February, largely because my > available free time evaporated. But I do intend to get back to it > when I have a chance. But you're right, the storage position stuff > I've worked on is completely independent from display positions, and > certainly wouldn't prevent that being added separately. > > > > > Is there any chance you keep us posted with your progress and post a > > preliminary patch exposing your design choices? This could allow other > > people to see if there are interesting results with their particular > > database and workload. > > > > Yeah, I'll try to clean things up and post a patch eventually. And if > anyone feels like working on the display position piece, let me know; > perhaps we could pool our efforts for 8.4.
Hi Phil, Did you make any progress on this cleanup? It seems like a good timing to revive this project if we want it for 8.4. Thanks for your feedback. -- Guillaume -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
