Re: [HACKERS] Add support for tuple routing to foreign partitions

(2018/02/23 16:38), Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Etsuro Fujita
> <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>  wrote:
>> This would introduce an asymmetry (we can move tuples from plain partitions
>> to foreign partitions, but the reverse is not true), but I am thinking that
>> it would be probably okay to document about that.

> About just documenting the asymmetry you mentioned that's caused by
> the fact that we don't enforce constraints on foreign tables, I
> started wondering if we shouldn't change our stance on the matter wrt
> "partition" constraints?

I'm not sure that it's a good idea to make an exception in that case. 
Another concern is triggers on the remote side; those might change the 
row so that the partition constraint of the containing partition is no 
longer satisfied.

> But, admittedly, that's a topic for a
> different thread.

OK, I'll leave that for another patch.

Will post a new version.  Thanks for the comments!

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita