Re: [HACKERS] Mishandling of WCO constraints in direct foreign tablemodification
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Mishandling of WCO constraints in direct foreign tablemodification |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a4baaf5d-af3b-0cb4-d1dd-093fdc09d453@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Mishandling of WCO constraints in direct foreigntable modification (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Mishandling of WCO constraints in direct foreign table modification
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/07/21 17:18, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:00:03 +0900, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in <15aa9936-9bd8-c9e3-7ca1-3948610734b4@lab.ntt.co.jp> >> Attached is the second version which updated docs in postgres-fdw.sgml >> as well. > > ! no local joins for the query, no row-level local <literal>BEFORE</> or > ! <literal>AFTER</> triggers on the target table, and no > ! <literal>CHECK OPTION</> constraints from parent views. > ! In <command>UPDATE</>, > > Might be a silly question, is CHECK OPTION a "constraint"? I mean constraints derived from WITH CHECK OPTIONs specified for parent views. We use the words "WITH CHECK OPTION constraints" in comments in nodeModifyTable.c, so the expression "CHECK OPTION constrains" doesn't sound not that bad to me. (I used "CHECK OPTION", not "WITH CHECK OPTION", because we use "CHECK OPTION" a lot more in the documentation than "WITH CHECK OPTION".) Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: