Re: Review: UNNEST (and other functions) WITH ORDINALITY

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:23:17PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Greg Stark (stark(at)mit(dot)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 <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)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