Re: partition routing layering in nodeModifyTable.c

Hi,

On 2019-07-31 21:03:58 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> I'm still not sure that it's a good idea to remove
> es_result_relation_info, but if I had to say then I think the latter
> would probably be better.  I'm planning to rework on direct
> modification to base it on upper planner pathification so we can
> perform direct modification without the ModifyTable node.  (I'm not
> sure we can really do this for inherited UPDATE/DELETE, though.)  For
> that rewrite, I'm thinking to call BeginDirectModify() from the
> ForeignScan node (ie, ExecInitForeignScan()) as-is.  The latter
> approach would allow that without any changes and avoid changing that
> API many times.  That's the reason why I think the latter would
> probably be better.

I think if we did that, it'd become *more* urgent to remove
es_result_relation. Having more and more plan nodes change global
resources is a recipse for disaster.

Greetings,

Andres Freund