Rod Taylor wrote: > For the latter one, it could be argued that the user understands the > table in question and has inserted the values they require. New > columns are added at the end, and probably don't affect the operation > in question so why should it be changed to suit new columns? But, > automated code should always be written with the columns explicitly > listed, so this may be a user who has simply forgotten to add the > value -- easy to do on wide tables.
I think our new DEFAULT for insert allows people to properly match all columns, and I think it is too error prone to allow missing columns in any INSERT. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]