On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 23:38, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:16 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>> On the other hand, I don't really see any advantage to allowing rules >>> on foreign tables - ever. Unless there's some reason we really need >>> that, my gut feeling would be to rip it out and forget about it. >> >> views, updateable views? > > We already have those. They have their own relkind. Why would we > need to duplicate that here?
We need RULEs or INSTEAD OF TRIGGERs to support updatable foreign tables. Do you suggest to define a wrapper view if we want to create an updatable foreign table? I think users don't like such kind of wrappers. -- Itagaki Takahiro -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
