From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Questions and experiences writing a Foreign Data Wrapper |
Date: | 2011-07-23 14:42:36 |
Message-ID: | 2426.1311432156@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> What does the standard say?
Well, there is not a statement in so many words that you have to have a
relevant USER MAPPING to use a foreign table. But the spec does specify
that an FDW's ConnectServer function takes a UserHandle as one input
parameter and should throw an exception if that handle isn't valid.
And as far as I can tell a UserHandle can only be created from a
relevant USER MAPPING entry. So I think the behavior I'm arguing for
would emerge from an FDW that was built using the spec-defined API.
We only have an opportunity to argue about it because we chose to
invent our own FDW API.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-07-23 14:45:16 | Re: proposal: a validator for configuration files |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-07-23 13:19:32 | Re: Problem with pg_upgrade's directory write check on Windows |