On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:09:20PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> David
>
> On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, David Fetter wrote:
> >
> > There are a lot of ways foreign tables don't yet act like local
> > ones. Much as I'm a booster for fixing that problem, I'm thinking
> > improvements in this direction are for a separate patch.
> >
>
> This isn't about making FDWs more like local tables- indeed, quite
> the opposite. The question is if we should declare that WITH
> ORDINALITY will only ever be for SRFs or if we should consider that
> it might be useful with FDWs specifically because they are not
> unordered sets as tables are. Claiming that question is unrelated
> to the implementation of WITH ORDINALITY is rather... Bizarre.
Are you saying that there's stuff that if I don't put it in now will
impede our ability to add this to FTs later?
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
