From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Writable foreign tables: how to identify rows |
Date: | 2013-03-13 14:30:21 |
Message-ID: | 25538.1363185021@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Yeah, I considered that. I thought seriously about proposing that we
>> forget magic row identifiers altogether, and instead make postgres_fdw
>> require a remote primary key for a foreign table to be updatable.
> IMO, Utilizing anything but this for remote record identification is
> an implementation specific optimization. Aren't the semantics
> different though? If you go:
> update foo set id = 1 where id = 1;
> the primary key would not change, but the ctid would. or is that
> already a handled?
In postgres_fdw as it currently stands, the remote ctid would change.
I'm not sure we should posit that as a universal property of FDWs
though. It's not even a meaningful question for FDWs with no underlying
rowid concept.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-03-13 14:35:51 | Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review] |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-03-13 14:22:52 | Re: Writable foreign tables: how to identify rows |