On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:09:20PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > David > > On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, David Fetter wrote: > > > > There are a lot of ways foreign tables don't yet act like local > > ones. Much as I'm a booster for fixing that problem, I'm thinking > > improvements in this direction are for a separate patch. > > > > This isn't about making FDWs more like local tables- indeed, quite > the opposite. The question is if we should declare that WITH > ORDINALITY will only ever be for SRFs or if we should consider that > it might be useful with FDWs specifically because they are not > unordered sets as tables are. Claiming that question is unrelated > to the implementation of WITH ORDINALITY is rather... Bizarre.
Are you saying that there's stuff that if I don't put it in now will impede our ability to add this to FTs later? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
