| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [(known) BUG] DELETE/UPDATE more than one row in partitioned foreign table |
| Date: | 2026-06-10 22:30:42 |
| Message-ID: | ainlkoxb4m84ZJRD@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 08:30:46PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> To address this, I think it would be good if we could 1) extend the
> concept of inheritance to cover remote inheritances, like pt, and 2)
> extend inherited UPDATE/DELETE so that we update/delete leaf tables,
> like pt_p2, somehow directly, as done for local inheritances. I'm not
> sure about how to do that, though.
FWIW, I think that there is a good argument for keeping it down to
simpler, and just not care about the option chain in such cases,
leaving it up to users to address that with two imports anyway? Just
having the option at one level would solve most historical problems I
could see on this thread. Good is sometimes a better option than
theoretically perfect. And good here means a simpler implementation
overall, at least it seems to me so..
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-06-10 22:33:47 | Re: Discard ORDER BY/DISTINCT when an ANY/IN sublink is pulled up to a join |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-06-10 22:25:28 | Re: [(known) BUG] DELETE/UPDATE more than one row in partitioned foreign table |