Re: FDW table hints
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: FDW table hints |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | BANLkTiky-0ewK6KsoqxvQ1yn_QkKXFq5fg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: FDW table hints (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: FDW table hints
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
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/
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: