| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "Etsuro Fujita *EXTERN*" <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Shigeru Hanada *EXTERN*" <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW |
| Date: | 2014-08-27 14:02:21 |
| Message-ID: | 29788.1409148141@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
>> Reading the code, I noticed that the pushed down UPDATE or DELETE statement is executed
>> during postgresBeginForeignScan rather than during postgresIterateForeignScan.
>> It probably does not matter, but is there a reason to do it different from the normal scan?
> Hmm, I'm worried that may be an API contract violation.
Indeed it is. You could get away with it if you check the
EXEC_FLAG_EXPLAIN_ONLY flag before doing anything with visible
side-effects, but it's still pretty ugly.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-08-27 14:04:06 | Re: replication commands and log_statements |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-08-27 13:59:21 | Re: Specifying the unit in storage parameter |