Re: Confusing docs about GetForeignUpperPaths in fdwhandler.sgml

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I'm not interested in committing this patch.  I don't believe it is an
> improvement on what we've got today.
> Tom, any chance you could offer an opinion?

I have no objection to this patch as such, but I think that the docs
around FDW direct modify need significantly more work than this.
I've had a to-do item for awhile to work on that, but it hasn't gotten
to the top of the list.

A larger issue is that I think the API itself is poorly designed, as
I stated awhile ago (<31706.1457547166@sss.pgh.pa.us>) and was told it
was too late to object.  So that's kind of discouraged me from bothering.
        regards, tom lane