Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 63480889-acdb-c080-ec3a-bb9be140db2b@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016/11/21 22:02, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: You wrote: >>>> Instead we should calculate tlist, the >>>> first time we need it and then add it to the fpinfo. I wrote: >> Having said that, I agree on that point. I'd like to propose (1) adding a >> new member to fpinfo, to store a list of output Vars from the subquery, and >> (2) creating a tlist from it in deparseRangeTblRef, then, which would allow >> us to calculate the tlist only when we need it. The member added to fpinfo >> would be also useful to address the comments on the DML/UPDATE pushdown >> patch. See the attached patch in [1]. I named the member a bit differently >> in that patch, though. > Again the list of Vars will be wasted if we don't choose that path for > final planning. So, I don't see the point of adding list of Vars > there. > If you think that the member is useful for DML/UDPATE pushdown, > you may want to add it in the other patch. OK, I'd like to propose referencing to foreignrel->reltarget->exprs directly in deparseRangeTblRef and get_subselect_alias_id, then, which is the same as what I proposed in the first version of the patch, but I'd also like to change deparseRangeTblRef to use add_to_flat_tlist, not make_tlist_from_pathtarget, to create a tlist of the subquery, as you proposed. >> You modified the comments I added to deparseLockingClause into this: >> >> /* >> + * Ignore relation if it appears in a lower subquery. Locking clause >> + * for such a relation is included in the subquery. >> + */ >> >> I don't think the second sentence is 100% correct because a locking clause >> isn't always required for such a relation, so I modified the sentence a bit. > I guess, "if required" part was implicit in construct "such a > relation". Your version seems to make it explicit. I am fine with it. OK, let's leave that for the committer's judge. Please find attached an updated version of the patch. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: