Re: Foreign Tables as Partitions

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:41:14AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:56 PM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> > Please find attached a PoC patch to implement $subject.
> >
> > So far, with a lot of help from Andrew Gierth, I've roughed out an
> > implementation which allows you to ALTER FOREIGN TABLE so it inherits
> > a local table.
> >
> > TBD: CREATE FOREIGN TABLE ... INHERITS ..., docs, regression testing,
> > etc., etc.
>
> I think this could be useful, but it's going to take more than a
> three-line patch.

Of course!

> Removing code that prohibits things is easy; what's hard is
> verifying that nothing else breaks as a result. And I bet it does.

It may well. I see our relations eventually being as equivalent as
their definitions permit (views, materialized or not, foreign tables,
etc.), and this as work toward that. Yes, it's normative, and we may
never fully get there, but I'm pretty sure it's worth working towards.

> This functionality was actually present in the original submission
> for foreign tables. I ripped it out before commit because I didn't
> think all of the interactions with other commands had been
> adequately considered. But I think they did consider it to some
> degree, which this patch does not.

A ref to the patch as submitted & patch as applied would help a lot :)

Were there any particular things you managed to break with the patch
as submitted? Places you thought would be soft but didn't poke at?

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate