On 2015/05/26 3:15, Tom Lane wrote:
Etsuro Fujita writes:
On 2015/05/22 23:50, Tom Lane wrote:
So I think worrying about convalidated is pretty pointless. Really,
it is up to the user to determine what constraints should be attached
to the foreign table, and IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA can't help m
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> On 2015/05/22 23:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So I think worrying about convalidated is pretty pointless. Really,
>> it is up to the user to determine what constraints should be attached
>> to the foreign table, and IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA can't help much.
> Agreed. So, I'd like
On 2015/05/22 23:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> Etsuro Fujita writes:
>> I agree with you on that point. And I think one option for that is that
>> IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA only imports CHECK constraints of remote tables
>> from a remote server that have convalidated = true. (If doing so, we
>> wouldn't nee
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> I agree with you on that point. And I think one option for that is that
> IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA only imports CHECK constraints of remote tables
> from a remote server that have convalidated = true. (If doing so, we
> wouldn't need to allow IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to retu
On 2015/05/22 1:36, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
On 2015/05/16 3:32, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
On second thought, I noticed that as for this option, we cannot live
without
allowing IMPORT FOREIGN SCHE
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2015/05/16 3:32, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Etsuro Fujita
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On second thought, I noticed that as for this option, we cannot live
>>> without
>>> allowing IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to return ALTER FO
On 2015-05-18 PM 06:45, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2015/05/18 17:44, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2015-05-18 PM 05:03, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>>> Let me explain. I think that convalidated would be *essential* for
>>> accurately
>>> performing relation_excluded_by_constraints for foreign tables like pla
On 2015/05/18 17:44, Amit Langote wrote:
On 2015-05-18 PM 05:03, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/05/16 3:32, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
On second thought, I noticed that as for this option, we cannot live without
allowing IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to ret
On 2015-05-18 PM 05:03, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2015/05/16 3:32, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Etsuro Fujita
>> wrote:
>>> On second thought, I noticed that as for this option, we cannot live without
>>> allowing IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to return ALTER FOREIGN TABLE statem
On 2015/05/16 3:32, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
On second thought, I noticed that as for this option, we cannot live without
allowing IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to return ALTER FOREIGN TABLE statements
because we cannot declare the convalidated informatio
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:37 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On second thought, I noticed that as for this option, we cannot live without
> allowing IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to return ALTER FOREIGN TABLE statements
> because we cannot declare the convalidated information in the CREATE FOREIGN
> TABLE stat
On 2015/04/30 2:10, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
Authorizing ALTER FOREIGN TABLE as query string that a FDW can use
with IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA is a different feature than what is
proposed in this patch, aka an option for postgres_fdw and meritates a
On 2015/04/30 17:15, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/04/30 2:10, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
Authorizing ALTER FOREIGN TABLE as query string that a FDW can use
with IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA is a different feature than what is
proposed in this patch, aka
On 2015/04/30 2:10, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
Authorizing ALTER FOREIGN TABLE as query string that a FDW can use
with IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA is a different feature than what is
proposed in this patch, aka an option for postgres_fdw and meritates a
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Authorizing ALTER FOREIGN TABLE as query string that a FDW can use
> with IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA is a different feature than what is
> proposed in this patch, aka an option for postgres_fdw and meritates a
> discussion on its own because it
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2015/04/27 15:51, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I noticed that there is no postgres_fdw option to control whether check
>>> constraints on remote tables are included in the d
On 2015/04/27 15:51, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
I noticed that there is no postgres_fdw option to control whether check
constraints on remote tables are included in the definitions of foreign
tables imported from a remote PG server when performi
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that there is no postgres_fdw option to control whether check
> constraints on remote tables are included in the definitions of foreign
> tables imported from a remote PG server when performing IMPORT FOREIGN
> SCHEMA, while
Hi,
I noticed that there is no postgres_fdw option to control whether check
constraints on remote tables are included in the definitions of foreign
tables imported from a remote PG server when performing IMPORT FOREIGN
SCHEMA, while we now allow check constraints on foreign tables.
Attached is a
19 matches
Mail list logo
