On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:23:17PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Greg Stark (st...@mit.edu) wrote: > > So given that WITH ORDINALITY is really only useful for UNNEST and we > > can generalize it to all SRFs on the basis that Postgres SRFs do > > produce ordered sets not unordered relations it isn't crazy for the > > work to be in the Function node. > > I agree, it isn't *crazy*. :) > > > Now that I've written that though it occurs to me to wonder whether > > FDW tables might be usefully said to be ordered too though? > > My thought around this was a VALUES() construct, but FDWs are an > interesting case to consider also; with FDWs it's possible that > something is said in SQL/MED regarding this question- perhaps it would > make sense to look there?
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. 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
