Hi David, On 2019/03/06 11:06, David Rowley wrote: > On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 03:01, Derek Hans <derek.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Based on a reply to reporting this as a bug, moving rows out of foreign >> partitions is not yet implemented so this is behaving as expected. There's a >> mention of this limitation in the Notes section of the Update docs. > > (Moving this discussion to -Hackers) > > In [1], Derek reports that once a row is inserted into a foreign > partition that an UPDATE does not correctly route it back out into the > correct partition. > > I didn't really follow the foreign partition code when it went in, but > do recall being involved in the documentation about the limitations of > partitioned tables in table 5.10.2.3 in [2]. Unfortunately, table > 5.10.2.3 does not seem to mention this limitation at all. As Derek > mentions, there is a brief mention in [3] in the form of: > > "Currently, rows cannot be moved from a partition that is a foreign > table to some other partition, but they can be moved into a foreign > table if the foreign data wrapper supports it." > > I don't quite understand what a "foreign table to some other > partition" is meant to mean. Partitions don't have foreign tables, > they can only be one themselves. > > I've tried to put all this right again in the attached. However, I was > a bit unsure of what "but they can be moved into a foreign table if > the foreign data wrapper supports it." is referring to. Copying Robert > and Etsuro as this was all added in 3d956d9562aa. Hopefully, they can > confirm what is meant by this.
Did you miss my reply on that thread? https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BHiwqF3gma5HfCJb4_cOk0_%2BLEpVc57EHdBfz_EKt%2BNu0hNYg%40mail.gmail.com Thanks, Amit
