On 2015/10/03 5:57, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
ISTM that the sentence "as remote constraints are not locally known" is
somewhat confusing, because check constrains on remote tables can be
defin
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
> wrote:
>> ISTM that the sentence "as remote constraints are not locally known" is
>> somewhat confusing, because check constrains on remote tables can be
>> defined locally in 9.5. How about
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> ISTM that the sentence "as remote constraints are not locally known" is
> somewhat confusing, because check constrains on remote tables can be
> defined locally in 9.5. How about "unique constraints or exclusion
> constraints on remote tables
