(2018/02/23 16:38), Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Etsuro Fujita
> <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> This would introduce an asymmetry (we can move tuples from plain partitions
>> to foreign partitions, but the reverse is not true), but I am thinking that
>> it would be probably okay to document about that.
> About just documenting the asymmetry you mentioned that's caused by
> the fact that we don't enforce constraints on foreign tables, I
> started wondering if we shouldn't change our stance on the matter wrt
> "partition" constraints?
I'm not sure that it's a good idea to make an exception in that case.
Another concern is triggers on the remote side; those might change the
row so that the partition constraint of the containing partition is no
longer satisfied.
> But, admittedly, that's a topic for a
> different thread.
OK, I'll leave that for another patch.
Will post a new version. Thanks for the comments!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
