Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update: < * Allow adding enumerated values to an existing
by Andreas.Zeugswetter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
("Zeugswetter Andreas OSB S
Apr 28, 2008 at 10:54 AM
> I don't understand this if it's calling option 2 the monolithic
> implementation. I was intending that the values be permanent tokens if
> you like, so that ZERO rewriting would be required for any types of
> modification. So I don't see where locking comes in. I don't want
> rewriting either.
I think you are not considering existing btree indexes here
(for the reordering case) ?
So +1 on a solution that has naturally sorting keys (e.g. your 1).=20
Andreas
--=20
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
