On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 01:39:48AM -0500, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> You can't know that, as a matter of SQL semantics.
I shouldn't reply to listmail when bone tired. I was thinking of
rows. Sorry.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postg
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 05:36:13PM +0100, toruvinn wrote:
> Actually, I prefer it the old way. I just like to know the column order
> `SELECT *' would return (though I never use `SELECT *' myself). Not to
You can't know that, as a matter of SQL semantics.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED
"Jaime Casanova" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> this patch fixes this and makes the output of \d much more usable.
>>
>> Calling this a "bug" isn't a good way to start a discussion about it.
> specially because this *fix* wi
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> this patch fixes this and makes the output of \d much more usable.
>
> Calling this a "bug" isn't a good way to start a discussion about it.
>
specially because this *fix* will lead to confusions about the order
of columns
"Ferdinand Gassauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> currently the columns are sorted by attnum (not very userfriendly) instead
> of attname (userfriendly)
This is intentional.
> this patch fixes this and makes the output of \d much more usable.
Calling this a "bug" isn't a good way to start a dis
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:19:38 +0100, Ferdinand Gassauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
currently the columns are sorted by attnum (not very userfriendly)
instead
of attname (userfriendly)
Actually, I prefer it the old way. I just like to know the column order
`SELECT *' would return (though I never
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4547
Logged by: Ferdinand Gassauer
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.3.5
Operating system: any
Description:sort columns in \d
Details:
currently the columns are sorted by attnum (not very
