| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Join push-down for foreign tables |
| Date: | 2011-12-02 23:05:03 |
| Message-ID: | 26504.1322867103@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Hmm, so you're saying that the FDW function needs to be able to return
> multiple paths for a single joinrel. Fair enough, and that's not
> specific to remote joins. Even a single-table foreign scan could be
> implemented differently depending on whether you prefer fast-start or
> cheapest total.
... or ordered vs unordered, etc. Yeah, good point, we already got this
wrong with the PlanForeignScan API. Good thing we didn't promise that
would be stable.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Farina | 2011-12-02 23:25:59 | Re: backup_label during crash recovery: do we know how to solve it? |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-12-02 23:04:57 | Re: Command Triggers |