On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 23:45, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> We need RULEs or INSTEAD OF TRIGGERs to support updatable foreign tables. > > We do? Why can't the support for updating foreign tables be built-in > rather than trigger-based?
Do we have any concrete idea for the built-in update feature? There are no definitions in the SQL standard about interface for updates. So, I think RULE and TRIGGER are the best solution for now. In addition, even if we support some kinds of built-in update feature, I still think RULE and TRIGGER are useful, for example, logging purpose. -- 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
