On 10/10/2011 11:59 AM, David Fetter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:23:51AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 10/10/2011 09:51 AM, Shigeru Hanada wrote:
At a quick glance, this patch seems to have an issue about priority.
Which value is used if an option has been set both on a foreign table
and a foreign server?
Also I think documents and regression tests would be required for
this kind of change.
I'm not even sure I understand why we should want this anyway. The
closest analog I can think of to a more conventional server is that
the whole file system is the foreign server, and there just don't
seem to be any relevant options at that level. All the options being
supplied seem much saner left as just foreign table options.
You raise an excellent point, which is that there probably should be
options at that level which override the (settable) generic file_fdw
options.
That's not my point at all.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
