Re: IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA statement

Le lundi 7 juillet 2014 07:58:33 Robert Haas a écrit :
> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> writes:
> >> In addition to data type mapping questions (which David already raised)
> >> I have one problem when I think of the Oracle FDW:
> >>
> >> Oracle follows the SQL standard in folding table names to upper case.
> >> So this would normally result in a lot of PostgreSQL foreign tables
> >> with upper case names, which would be odd and unpleasant.
> >>
> >> I cannot see a way out of that, but I thought I should mention it.
> >
> > It seems like it would often be desirable for the Oracle FDW to smash
> > all-upper-case names to all-lower-case while importing, so that no quoting
> > is needed on either side. I doubt though that this is so desirable that
> > it should happen unconditionally.
> >
> > Between this and the type-mapping questions, it seems likely that
> > we're going to need a way for IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA to accept
> > user-supplied control options, which would in general be specific
> > to the FDW being used. (Another thing the SQL committee failed to
> > think about.)
>
> Is this part of the SQL standard? What is it defined to do about
> non-table objects?

The OPTIONS clause is not part of the SQL Standard.

Regarding non-table objects, the standard only talks about tables, and nothing
else.

--
Ronan Dunklau
http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org