Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55307F90.7080405@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres
FDW
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015/04/17 10:23, Amit Langote wrote: > By the way, one suggestion may be to attach a "(pushed down)" to the > ModifyTable's "Foreign Update". And in that case, there would be no mention of > corresponding scan node in the list below exactly because there would be none. > > postgres=# explain verbose update parent set c1 = c1; > QUERY PLAN > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Update on public.parent (cost=0.00..364.54 rows=4819 width=10) > Update on public.parent > Foreign Update (pushed down) on public.ft1 > Foreign Update (pushed down) on public.ft2 > -> Seq Scan on public.parent (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=10) > Output: parent.c1, parent.ctid Thanks for the suggestion! I'm not sure that that is a good idea because (1) that is contrary to the reality (the update pushdown patch lets the ForeignScan nodes do UPDATE/DELETE RETURNING and then do nothing at ModifyTable!) and because (2) that might cause the problem of associating subplans' update information with subplans' scan information, pointed out by Tom [1]. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/22505.1426986174@sss.pgh.pa.us
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: