Re: inherit support for foreign tables

From: Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: inherit support for foreign tables
Date: 2014-02-21 02:38:00
Message-ID: 5306BC08.2000009@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

(2014/02/20 19:55), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2014/02/20 15:47), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
>> Although my concerns here are only two points,
>> unanticipated application and "maintenancibility". I gave a
>> consideration on these issues again.
>
> Sorry, I misunderstood what you mean by "unanticipated application".
>
>> Then, I think it could be enough by giving feedback to operators
>> for the first issue.
>>
>> =# ALTER TABLE parent ADD CHECK (tempmin < tempmax),
>> ALTER tempmin SET NOT NULL,
>> ALTER tempmin SET DEFAULT 0;
>> NOTICE: Child foregn table child01 is affected.
>> NOTICE: Child foregn table child02 is affected
>> NOTICE: Child foregn table child03 rejected 'alter tempmin set default'
>>
>> What do you think about this? It looks a bit too loud for me
>> though...
>
> I think that's a good idea.

I just thought those messages would be shown for the user to readily
notice the changes of the structures of child tables that are foreign,
done by the recursive altering operation. But I overlooked the third line:

NOTICE: Child foregn table child03 rejected 'alter tempmin set default'

What does "rejected" in this message mean?

Thanks,

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2014-02-21 03:23:09 Re: Selecting large tables gets killed
Previous Message Haribabu Kommi 2014-02-21 01:02:54 Re: Priority table or Cache table