|From:||Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|To:||Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: Push down more UPDATEs/DELETEs in postgres_fdw|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2016/11/16 13:10, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
> <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> On 2016/11/15 19:04, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>>> Your latest patch doesn't not get apply cleanly apply on master branch.
>> Did you apply the patch set in  (postgres-fdw-subquery-support-v4.patch
>> and postgres-fdw-phv-pushdown-v4.patch in this order) before applying the
>> latest patch?
> I don't see any reason why DML/UPDATE pushdown should depend upon
> subquery deparsing or least PHV patch. Combined together they can help
> in more cases, but without those patches, we will be able to push-down
> more stuff. Probably, we should just restrict push-down only for the
> cases when above patches are not needed. That makes reviews easy. Once
> those patches get committed, we may add more functionality depending
> upon the status of this patch. Does that make sense?
OK, I'll extract from the patch the minimal part that wouldn't depend on
the two patches.
|Next Message||Andrew Borodin||2016-11-16 07:46:50||Re: Fractal tree indexing|
|Previous Message||Noah Misch||2016-11-16 07:32:43||Re: Document how to set up TAP tests for Perl 5.8.8|