On 9 May 2018 at 15:57, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> For right now, I think the options are (1) throw an ERROR if we
> encounter a foreign table or (2) silently skip the foreign table. I
> think (2) is defensible for non-UNIQUE indexes, because the index is
> just a performance optimization. However, for UNIQUE indexes, at
> least, it seems like we'd better do (1), because a major point of such
> an index is to enforce a constraint; we can't allege that we have such
> a constraint if foreign tables are just silently skipped.
If we can assume an index exists on a foreign table, why can we not
just assume a unique index exists?? Why the difference?
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services