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 (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
