Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28625.1363980599@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables) (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3]
writable foreign tables)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> writes: > This contains some edits to comments that referred to the obsolete and > bogus TupleDesc scanning. No mechanical alterations. Applied with some substantial revisions. I didn't like where you'd put the apply/restore calls, for one thing --- we need to wait to do the applies until we have the PGresult in hand, else we might be applying stale values of the remote's GUCs. Also, adding a call that could throw errors right before materializeResult() won't do, because that would result in leaking the PGresult on error. The struct for state seemed a bit of a mess too, given that you couldn't always initialize it in one place. (In hindsight I could have left that alone given where I ended up putting the calls, but it didn't seem to be providing any useful isolation.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: