On 2016-08-05 14:05:02 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > On 2016-08-05 13:32:18 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> I think if we're going to add support utility commands on foreign
> >> tables, we ought to think about all of the different utility commands
> >> that someone might want and what exactly we want the behavior to be.
> >> For example, consider CLUSTER or CREATE INDEX or VACUUM or ANALYZE.
> >> We might interpret TRUNCATE or CLUSTER as a request to dispatch the
> >> same request for the remote side, but ANALYZE can't mean that: it has
> >> to mean gather local statistics. And what if the other side is not PG
> >> and supports other operations that we don't have, like OPTIMIZE TABLE
> >> or DISENGAGE FTL?
> > That's not really comparable imo - we don't have triggers for those
> > locally either. For better or worse we've decided that TRUNCATE is more
> > like DML than DDL.
> I agree, but I still think it's weird if foreign tables support
> TRUNCATE itself not but triggers on TRUNCATE.
You mean the other way round? To me this seems very comparable to
INSTEAD triggers, but ...
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: