Re: [HACKERS] Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw |
Дата | |
Msg-id | f80fd422-b5f3-a2e1-92ac-21a1dba1dd46@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/01/03 17:28, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: I wrote: >> I updated the patch a bit further: simplified the function name >> (s/build_subquery_rel_tlists/build_subquery_tlists/), and revised comments a >> little bit. Attached is an updated version >> (postgres-fdw-subquery-support-v14.patch). > Few comments Thanks for the comments! > In build_subquery_tlists(), why don't we handle base relations? > + if (foreignrel->reloptkind != RELOPT_JOINREL) > + return; The reason for that is we don't need to handle the baserel cases; the tlist for a base relation, if needed, would be created while recursing into a join relation that joins the base relation to other base/join relation. > Also, in this function, if fpinfo->tlist is already set, why do we want to > build it again? When this function gets called, fpinfo->tlist isn't set for any base or join relation that needs to build the tlist, so we always need to build it for each such relation. > In build_tlist_to_deparse(), if fpinfo->tlist for the given relation is set, we > should just return it rather than constructing it again. In that function we wouldn't have such cases for base or join relations needing the tlist. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: