On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Simon Riggs <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9 May 2018 at 16:15, Robert Haas <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Simon Riggs <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 9 May 2018 at 16:10, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes: >>>>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Simon Riggs <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Shouldn't the fix be to allow creation of indexes on foreign tables? >>>>>> (Maybe they would be virtual or foreign indexes??) >>>> >>>>> It might be useful to invent the concept of a foreign index, but not >>>>> for v11 a month after feature freeze. >>>> >>>> Yeah. That's a can of worms we can *not* open at this stage. >>> >>> Lucky nobody suggested that then, eh? Robert's just making a joke. >> >> Someone did suggest that. It was you. > > Oh, you weren't joking. I think we're having serious problems with > people putting words in my mouth again then. > > Please show me where I suggested doing anything for v11?
Come on, Simon. It's in the quoted text. I realize you didn't say v11 specifically, but this is the context of a patch that is proposed a bug-fix for v11. If you meant that we should apply the patch as proposed now, or some other one, and do the other thing later, you could have said so. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
