Re: Status of FDW pushdowns

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, Denis Lussier <denis(dot)lussier(at)openscg(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Status of FDW pushdowns
Date: 2013-11-21 15:44:22
Message-ID: 22721.1385048662@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> writes:
> Right now, it performs on relation scan or join only. However, we will be
> able to apply same concept on aggregation.
> For example, an aggregation node on a foreign table scan is a good
> candidate to push down because it can be replaced with a custom-
> logic that scans a materialized result of the remote aggregation query,
> if its cost is enough cheap than local aggregation.
> Probably, we need to add a hook and some logic to compare the
> built-in aggregation and alternative paths provided by extensions.

Note that this is another thing that's blocked on Path-ifying the work
now done in grouping_planner. We don't currently have a way to represent
a local aggregation, much less a remote one, as a Path. We definitely
need that before we can open up any of that logic to FDWs.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-11-21 15:46:14 Re: Status of FDW pushdowns
Previous Message Kohei KaiGai 2013-11-21 15:35:46 Re: Status of FDW pushdowns