Re: Indexes on partitioned tables and foreign partitions

On 9 May 2018 at 17:33, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 9 May 2018 at 16:15, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> On 9 May 2018 at 16:10, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>>>>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Shouldn't the fix be to allow creation of indexes on foreign tables?
>>>>>>> (Maybe they would be virtual or foreign indexes??)
>>>>>
>>>>>> It might be useful to invent the concept of a foreign index, but not
>>>>>> for v11 a month after feature freeze.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah. That's a can of worms we can *not* open at this stage.
>>>>
>>>> Lucky nobody suggested that then, eh? Robert's just making a joke.
>>>
>>> Someone did suggest that. It was you.
>>
>> Oh, you weren't joking. I think we're having serious problems with
>> people putting words in my mouth again then.
>>
>> Please show me where I suggested doing anything for v11?
>
> Come on, Simon. It's in the quoted text.

No, its not.

> I realize you didn't say
> v11 specifically, but this is the context of a patch that is proposed
> a bug-fix for v11. If you meant that we should apply the patch as
> proposed now, or some other one, and do the other thing later, you
> could have said so.

I think its reasonable to expect you interpret my words sensibly,
rather than in some more dramatic form where I seem to break rules
with every phrase.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services