From: | Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ronan Dunklau <ronan(dot)dunklau(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA statement. |
Date: | 2014-02-21 11:15:20 |
Message-ID: | CAOeZVieqmnH4atF=X_JqnfeMTQZXCW9057jZruu7wgSQxnkq8g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Ronan Dunklau <ronan(dot)dunklau(at)dalibo(dot)com>wrote:
> > I havent had a look at the patch yet since I dont have a nice editor
> right
> > now, but how do you handle inter operability between datatypes?
> > Specifically, how do you handle those datatypes which have a different
> name
> > from the PostgreSQL name for them and/or are stored in a different
> manner?
>
> Do you mean in general, or for the postgres_fdw specifically ?
>
> In general, only valid column types should be accepted in the
> CreateForeignTableStmt. The CreateForeignTableStmt is passed through
> DefineRelation, which takes care of looking up the actual data types.
>
> For the postgres_fdw POC implementation, this is done by parsing the
> attributes type from the query result with the regtype input functions. The
> attribute typmod is injected too.
>
I actually meant in general. Thanks for the reply.
So please help me understand here. How exactly does CreateForeignTableStmt
help in type compatibility? A statement may be valid on a foreign server
but may not be compatible.
What am I missing here naively?
Regards,
Atri
--
Regards,
Atri
*l'apprenant*
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-02-21 11:19:02 | Re: Public header files change |
Previous Message | Pavel Raiskup | 2014-02-21 11:11:42 | Public header files change |