| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: I'd like to discuss scaleout at PGCon |
| Date: | 2018-06-01 15:27:14 |
| Message-ID: | 6975.1527866834@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> In order to avoid double parsing, we might want to find a way to pass
> a "normalized" parse tree down to the foreign server. We need to
> normalize the OIDs in the parse tree since those may be different
> across the nodes.
I don't think this is a good idea at all. It breaks any hope of
supporting remote servers that are not the identical version to the local
one (since their parsetrees might be different). And "normalized OIDs"
sounds like "pie in the sky". You might get away with asssuming that
built-in functions have stable OIDs, but you can't expect that for
functions in extensions.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2018-06-01 15:43:55 | Re: why partition pruning doesn't work? |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2018-06-01 15:21:52 | Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table |