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
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
The following is a remark about UPSERT in fdwhandler.sgml.
INSERT with an ON CONFLICT clause does not
support specifying the conflict target, as remote constraints are not
locally known. This in turn implies that ON CONFLICT DO
UPDATE is not supported, since the specification
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