Re: Remaining 9.5 open items

On 2015/12/09 2:56, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:05:47AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>> * Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual
>>>>
>>>> Is this fixed by 5fc4c26db? If not, what remains to do?

>>> Unfortunately, no. That commit allows FDWs to do proper EPQ handling
>>> for plain table scans, but it proves to be inadequate for EPQ handling
>>> for joins. Solving that problem will require another patch, and,
>>> modulo a bunch of cosmetic issues, I'm reasonably happy with KaiGai
>>> Kohei's latest submission. I'll respond in more detail on that
>>> thread, but the question I want to raise here is: do we want to
>>> back-patch those changes to 9.5 at this late date?

>> Yes. If 9.5 added a bad interface, better to fix the interface even now than
>> to live with the bad one.

> OK, I've pushed the latest patch for that issue to master and 9.5.
> I'm not completely positive we've killed this problem dead, but I hope
> so.

Thank you for committing the patch!

Sorry, I overlooked a typo in docs: s/more that one/more than one/
Please find attached a patch.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita