On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 16:19, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
>> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Susanne Ebrecht
>> <susanne@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> When we make such a hint for foreign tables then we should make a similar
>>> hint for views.
>
>> A view really isn't a table, unlike a foreign table, so I don't think
>> that argument holds.
>
> Well, from the implementation standpoint a foreign table is a lot more
> like a view than it is like a table. I think the real point is that a
> hint for this on views would be a waste of translator manpower, because
> we've not heard of anyone making that mistake.
The *implementation* is in this case, IMHO; irrelevant. The relevant
part is what it looks like to the *user*, and to the user a foreign
table looks a lot more like a table than a view does.
Since I brought it up - a patch along this line?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/