Message-ID: <52F8BF6F.2050204@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:00:47 +0900
From: Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Shigeru Hanada <shigeru.hanada@gmail.com>
CC: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: inherit support for foreign tables
References: 
 <CAEZqfEfVJNptoTSEY3QrQ90K9WD2nxfM+6fsk3YTc1ZXZ1Y5-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<12432.1384406906@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+Tgmob3ZNDi+P+v3ypHvFN1tD-Bpt8M+0dHFTnCqHxmcNw8aQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<10163.1384786524@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAEZqfEc6MkEx+L=bQHVPEjr_+LgWSzy8uA11ci=X0A8VEPRmiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<52DDD071.9090405@ak.jp.nec.com>
	<CAEZqfEe_enXpSFpS8S_q6a8gNHK8AKtD5vy=fYxTddRtR8uOmw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZiskpRfmSZuY01Uh3qBqPRb3-UgXnS-euUO5cw9Yst3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<52E5F3FD.6050000@lab.ntt.co.jp>	<52E6137B.1080704@lab.ntt.co.jp>
	<CAEZqfEdojfdzt9pHwsdYURNL5+JNrDUF-iMtmyh-LdDeAWcncA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEZqfEfYauyxZQvsKODM5BQKt+KsnNakFQxrHHdnivq6mO83rg@mail.gmail.com>
 <52F4D206.7010704@lab.ntt.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <52F4D206.7010704@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Shift_JIS
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

(2014/02/07 21:31), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> So, I've modified the patch so 
> that we continue to disallow SET STORAGE on a foreign table *in the same 
> manner as before*, but, as your patch does, allow it on an inheritance 
> hierarchy that contains foreign tables, with the semantics that we 
> quietly ignore the foreign tables and apply the operation to the plain 
> tables, by modifying the ALTER TABLE simple recursion mechanism. 
> Attached is the updated version of the patch.
> 
> I'll continue the patch review a bit more, though the patch looks good 
> generally to me except for the abobe issue and the way that the ANALYZE 
> command works.

While reviwing the patch, I've found some issues on interactions with
other commands, other than the SET STORAGE command.

* ADD table_constraint NOT VALID: the patch allows ADD table_constraint
*NOT VALID* to be set on a foreign table as well as an inheritance
hierarchy that contains foreign tables.  But I think it would be better
to disallow ADD table_constraint *NOT VALID* on a foreign table, but
allow it on an inheritance hierarchy that contains foreign tables, with
the semantics that we apply the operation to the plain tables and apply
the transformed operation *ADD table_constraint* to the foreign tables.

* VALIDATE CONSTRAINT constraint_name: though the patch disallow the
direct operation on foreign tables, it allows the operation on an
inheritance hierarchy that contains foreign tables, and the operation
fails if there is at least one foreign table that has at least one NOT
VALID constraint.  I think it would be better to modify the patch so
that we allow the operation on an inheritance hierarchy that contains
foreign tables, with the semantics that we quietly ignore the foreign
tables and apply the operation on the plain tables just like the
semantics of SET STORAGE.  (Note that the foreign tables wouldn't have
NOT VALID constraints by diallowing ADD table_constraint *NOT VALID* on
foreign tables as mentioned above.)

* SET WITH OIDS: though the patch disallow the direct operation on
foreign tables, it allows the operation on an inheritance hierarchy that
contains foreign tables, and that operation is successfully done on
foreign tables.  I think it would be better to modify the patch so that
we allow it on an inheritance hierarchy that contains foreign tables,
with the semantics that we quietly ignore the foreign tables and apply
the operation to the plain tables just like the semantics of SET STORAGE.

Comments are wellcome!

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita


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