On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On May 6, 2010, at 4:29 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> And many places regard "select *" in anything other than throw-away queries
>>> as bad practice anyway. I have seen people get bitten
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On May 6, 2010, at 4:29 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> And many places regard "select *" in anything other than throw-away queries
>>> as bad practice anyway. I have seen people get bitten
On May 6, 2010, at 4:29 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> And many places regard "select *" in anything other than throw-away queries
>> as bad practice anyway. I have seen people get bitten by it over and over
>> again, and I have worked at compa
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> And many places regard "select *" in anything other than throw-away queries
> as bad practice anyway. I have seen people get bitten by it over and over
> again, and I have worked at companies where it is explicitly forbidden in
> coding stand
Tom Lane wrote:
Joseph Adams writes:
This isn't exactly a bug, but it could be considered unintuitive
behavior.
It's required by the SQL standard.
And many places regard "select *" in anything other than throw-away
queries as bad practice anyway. I ha
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Joseph Adams wrote:
> This isn't exactly a bug, but it could be considered unintuitive
> behavior. Consider this:
by unintuitive you mean: 'explicitly defined in the SQL standard' :-).
I happen to agree with you but that's irrelevant. If you absolutely
require t
Joseph Adams writes:
> This isn't exactly a bug, but it could be considered unintuitive
> behavior.
It's required by the SQL standard.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://ww
This isn't exactly a bug, but it could be considered unintuitive
behavior. Consider this:
CREATE VIEW foo AS SELECT * FROM a;
CREATE VIEW foo_v AS SELECT * FROM foo;
ALTER TABLE foo ADD COLUMN b INT;
The ALTER TABLE statement affects VIEW foo, but the column addition
does not propagate to VIEW f
