Shigeru Hanada <shigeru.han...@gmail.com> writes: > At the moment we don't use attstorage for foreign tables, so allowing > SET STORAGE against foreign tables never introduce visible change > except \d+ output of foreign tables. But IMO such operation should > not allowed because users would be confused. So I changed > ATExecSetStorage() to skip on foreign tables.
I think this is totally misguided. Who's to say that some weird FDW might not pay attention to attstorage? I could imagine a file-based FDW using that to decide whether to compress columns, for instance. Admittedly, the chances of that aren't large, but it's pretty hard to argue that going out of our way to prevent it is a useful activity. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers