* Andrew Dunstan (andrew@dunslane.net) wrote:
> This isn't really a compromise. Remember that this discussion started
> with consideration of optimal record layout (minimising space use by
> reducing or eliminating alignment padding). The above proposal really
> does nothing for that.
While I agree that's how the discussion started the column ordering
issue can stand on its own and any proposal which provides that feature
should be considered. I don't think we should throw out the
rewrite-the-table idea because it doesn't solve other problems.
Thanks,
Stephen
