Re: [HACKERS] Another oddity in handling of WCO constraints in postgres_fdw

Greetings Robert, Ashutosh, Arthur, Etsuro, all,

* Arthur Zakirov (a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru) wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 08:09:50PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > Agreed. I added a comment to that function. I think that that comment in
> > combination with changes to the FDW docs in the patch would help FDW authors
> > understand why that is needed. Please find attached an updated version of
> > the patch.
>
> Thank you.
>
> All tests pass, the documentation builds. There was the suggestion [1]
> of different approach. But the patch fix the issue in much more simple
> way.
>
> Marked as "Ready for Commiter".
>
> 1 - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20171005.200631.134118679.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp

Thanks, I've looked through this patch and thread again and continue to
feel that this is both a good and sensible improvment and that the patch
is in pretty good shape.

The remaining question is if the subsequent discussion has swayed the
opinion of Robert and Ashutosh. If we can get agreement that these
semantics are acceptable and an improvement over the status quo then I'm
happy to try and drive this patch to commit.

Robert, Ashutosh?

Thanks!

Stephen