Re: partitioned table + postgres_FDW not working in 9.3 - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Lonni J Friedman
Subject Re: partitioned table + postgres_FDW not working in 9.3
Date
Msg-id CAP=oouGBwmSD=EXWwR5tL48aZBCeCJVjO6m3dRK-zv+fU8P=YA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: partitioned table + postgres_FDW not working in 9.3  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com> writes:
>> Thanks for your reply.  This sounds like a relatively simple
>> workaround, so I'll give it a try.  Is the search_path of the remote
>> session that postgres_fdw forces considered to be intentional,
>> expected behavior, or is it a bug?
>
> It's intentional.
>
> Possibly more to the point, don't you think your trigger function is
> rather fragile if it assumes the caller has provided a particular
> search path setting?

To be honest, I don't have much experience with functions, and was
using the trigger function from the official documentation:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/ddl-partitioning.html


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: partitioned table + postgres_FDW not working in 9.3
Next
From: Rob Richardson
Date:
Subject: How do I find a trigger function that is raising notices?