| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Scara Maccai <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: partitioning using dblink |
| Date: | 2008-03-03 17:18:15 |
| Message-ID: | 200803031718.m23HIFF27027@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Scara Maccai <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> writes:
> > I got that there should be no difference... plus, I don't get any
> > errors,
>
> You should have. The system enforces (or tries to) that a view can't be
> part of an inheritance hierarchy, but you seem to have managed to find a
> sequence of operations that avoids those checks. Turning a table into a
> view with a manual CREATE RULE operation has always been a kluge, and
> it's missing a check that the table isn't part of an inheritance tree.
Is this a TODO? Seems so.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-03-03 17:29:06 | Re: partitioning using dblink |
| Previous Message | paul rivers | 2008-03-03 16:40:42 | Re: Connect to postgres from a dynamic IP |