Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Surfacing qualifiers

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Surfacing qualifiers
Date: 2008-03-26 21:26:41
Message-ID: 1206566801.22579.7.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 14:38 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I'm still waiting to see an example of where you say this patch is even 
> marginally useful.

It's not hard to think of one:

SELECT * FROM remote_table() WHERE x = 5;

Applying the predicate on the remote database (pushing the predicate
below the function scan) is an elementary optimization, and in many
cases would be enormously more efficient than materializing the entire
remote table at the local site and then applying the qual there.

Certainly I agree with Tom that proper SQL/MED support requires
significant support from both the executor and the optimizer. This is
just a quick hack to take advantage of the existing predicate pushdown
logic -- I just thought it was a cute trick, not something I'd suggest
we include in mainline sources.

-Neil



In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-03-26 21:30:37
Subject: Timing of parameter/variable name lookup vs legacy behaviors
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2008-03-26 20:51:07
Subject: Re: Proposal: improve shutdown during online backup

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group