On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Daniele Varrazzo
> <daniele.varrazzo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm learning now something about foreign tables in PG 9.3. I wonder if
>> there is a clean way to use a sequence on the remote side, so that an
>> "insert into remote_table values ([data not including id]) returning
>> id" would ask the remote server to generate a new value for id.
> You could always define foreign table on local node without the
> columns having default values you want to enforce on remote side, and
> you may even be able to do well with such a definition on local side
> as it does not seem you want to make the default remotes visible on
> local side
Well, actually I do: see the query in question. The "returning id"
requires the field id to exist on the foreign table :)
> (always possible to use an extra foreign table definition
> btw). So for example:
Yes, of course, but I'm experimenting into how transparent would be to
replace the table with a foreign table and leave some working code
unchanged (it works fine with the trigger workaround). By the way even
if I had a table without id where to write to and one with the id to
read from doesn't help in detecting what unique id was generated
remotely.
-- Daniele
