On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 9 May 2018 at 16:15, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> On 9 May 2018 at 16:10, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Shouldn't the fix be to allow creation of indexes on foreign tables?
>>>>>> (Maybe they would be virtual or foreign indexes??)
>>>>
>>>>> It might be useful to invent the concept of a foreign index, but not
>>>>> for v11 a month after feature freeze.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah. That's a can of worms we can *not* open at this stage.
>>>
>>> Lucky nobody suggested that then, eh? Robert's just making a joke.
>>
>> Someone did suggest that. It was you.
>
> Oh, you weren't joking. I think we're having serious problems with
> people putting words in my mouth again then.
>
> Please show me where I suggested doing anything for v11?
Come on, Simon. It's in the quoted text. I realize you didn't say
v11 specifically, but this is the context of a patch that is proposed
a bug-fix for v11. If you meant that we should apply the patch as
proposed now, or some other one, and do the other thing later, you
could have said so.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company