On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 05:07:31AM +0000, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:17:05AM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > > My colleague Prabhat Sahu reported off list that transition tables > > don't work for views. I probably should have thought about that when > > I fixed something similar for partitioned tables, and after some > > experimentation I see that this is also broken for foreign tables. > > > > For foreign tables using postgres_fdw, I see that transition tables > > capture new rows for INSERT but capture nothing for DELETE and UPDATE. > > > > For views, aside from the question of transition tables, I noticed > > that statement triggers don't seem to fire at all with updatable > > views. Surely they should -- isn't that a separate bug? > > > > Example: > > > > create table my_table (i int); > > create view my_view as select * from my_table; > > create function my_trigger_function() returns trigger language plpgsql as > > $$ begin raise warning 'hello world'; return null; end; $$; > > create trigger my_trigger after insert or update or delete on my_view > > for each statement execute procedure my_trigger_function(); > > insert into my_view values (42); > > > > ... and the world remains ungreeted. > > > > As for transition tables, there are probably meaningful ways to > > support those for both views and foreign tables at least in certain > > cases, as future feature enhancements. For now, do you agree that we > > should reject such triggers as unsupported? See attached. > > [Action required within three days. This is a generic notification.] > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Kevin, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open > item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a > v10 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within three calendar days of > this message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed > well in advance of shipping v10. Consequently, I will appreciate your efforts > toward speedy resolution. Thanks. > > [1] > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com
This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers