| From: | Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | per-column FDW options, v5 |
| Date: | 2011-07-29 08:37:16 |
| Message-ID: | 4E32713C.20800@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Here is a rebased version of per-column FDW options patch. I've
proposed this patch in last CF, but it was marked as returned with
feedback. So I would like to propose in next CF 2011-09. I already
moved CF item into new topic "SQL/MED" of CF 2011-09.
I didn't change the patch except rebasing against head, so this patch
includes changes below:
* New attribute attfdwoptions of pg_attribute hold per-column FDW
options, so this patch needs bumping catversion.
* CREATE/ALTER FOREIGN TABLE statement accept OPTIONS (key 'value')
syntax for per-column FDW options.
* New information_schema.column_options view shows per-column FDW
options of accessible foreign tables.
* \d+ shows per-column options, only for foreign tables.
* pg_dump support dumping per-column FDW options as ALTER FOREIGN TABLE
statement.
IIUC, one of the reasons why this patch hasn't been accepted is that we
don't have a consensus about storage for per-column FDW options. I
think that separating attributes would be better for several reasons:
* FDW options might conflict reloptions/attoptions.
* FDW options and reloptions have different syntax, so pg_dump would
need to switch the format depending on target table's relkind.
I also attached a rebased version of force_not_null patch, which adds
force_not_null option support to file_fdw. This is a use case of
per-column FDW option.
Regards,
--
Shigeru Hanada
* 英語 - 自動検出
* 英語
* 日本語
* 英語
* 日本語
<javascript:void(0);>
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| per_column_option_v5.patch | text/plain | 45.3 KB |
| force_not_null_v2.patch | text/plain | 12.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2011-07-29 09:37:06 | Re: XMLATTRIBUTES vs. values of type XML |
| Previous Message | daveg | 2011-07-29 06:31:31 | Re: error: could not find pg_class tuple for index 2662 |