Hi Fujita-san,
Thanks for the reviewing.
2014-02-10 21:00 GMT+09:00 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> (2014/02/07 21:31), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> So, I've modified the patch so
>> that we continue to disallow SET STORAGE on a foreign table *in the same
>> manner as before*, but, as your patch does, allow it on an inheritance
>> hierarchy that contains foreign tables, with the semantics that we
>> quietly ignore the foreign tables and apply the operation to the plain
>> tables, by modifying the ALTER TABLE simple recursion mechanism.
>> Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I'm not sure that allowing ALTER TABLE against parent table affects
descendants even some of them are foreign table. I think the rule
should be simple enough to understand for users, of course it should
be also consistent and have backward compatibility.
If foreign table can be modified through inheritance tree, this kind
of change can be done.
1) create foreign table as a child of a ordinary table
2) run ALTER TABLE parent, the foreign table is also changed
3) remove foreign table from the inheritance tree by ALTER TABLE child
NO INHERIT parent
4) here we can't do same thing as 2), because it is not a child anymore.
So IMO we should determine which ALTER TABLE features are allowed to
foreign tables, and allow them regardless of the recursivity.
Comments?
--
Shigeru HANADA
