Re: [HACKERS] EvalPlanQual behaves oddly for FDW queries involvingsystem columns
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] EvalPlanQual behaves oddly for FDW queries involvingsystem columns |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5C77A9C5.9050805@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] EvalPlanQual behaves oddly for FDW queries involvingsystem columns (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] EvalPlanQual behaves oddly for FDW queries involvingsystem columns
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Andres, (2019/02/28 5:33), Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-05-12 14:24:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I did a very basic update of your postgres_fdw patch to test this with, >> and attach that so that you don't have to repeat the effort. I'm not sure >> whether we want to try to convert that into something committable. I'm >> afraid that the extra round trips involved in doing row locking this way >> will be so expensive that no one really wants it for postgres_fdw. It's >> more credible that FDWs operating against local storage would have use >> for it. > > Fujita-san, do you know of any FDWs that use this? No, I don't. > I'm currently > converting the EPQ machinery to slots, and in course of that I (with > Horiguchi-san's help), converted RefetchForeignRow to return a slot. But > there's currently no in-core user of this facility... I guess I can > rebase the preliminary postgres_fdw patch here, but it bitrotted > significantly. I'll rebase that patch and help the testing, if you want me to. > I also feel like there should be some test coverage for > an API in a nontrivial part of the code... Yeah, but as mentioned above, the row-locking API is provided for FDWs operating against local storage, which we don't have in core, unfortunately. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: