From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Only try to push down foreign joins if the user mapping OIDs mat |
Date: | 2016-03-16 16:12:45 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa80ZmsSYynOinCF3zzqx5kLE6Eetj3GE=hRPCV5tXB-w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Now what's going on here? It seems to me that either postgres_fdw
>> requires a user mapping (in which case this ought to fail) or it
>> doesn't (in which case this ought to push the join down). I don't
>> understand how working but not pushing the join down can ever be the
>> right behavior.
>>
> In 9.5, postgres_fdw allowed to prepare statements involving foreign
> tables without an associated user mapping as long as planning did not
> require the user mapping. Remember, planner would require user mapping in
> case use_remote_estimate is ON for that foreign table. The user mapping
> would be certainly required at the time of execution. So executing such a
> prepared statement would throw error. If somebody created a user mapping
> between prepare and execute, execute would not throw an error. A join can
> be pushed down only when user mappings associated with the joining
> relations are known and they match. But given the behavior of 9.5 we should
> let the prepare succeed, even if the join can not be pushed down because of
> unknown user mapping. Before this fix, the test was not letting the prepare
> succeed, which is not compliant with 9.5.
>
If a query against a single table with no user mapping is legal, I don't
see why pushing down a join between two tables neither of which has a user
mapping shouldn't also be legal.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2016-03-16 16:24:10 | pgsql: Add files forgotten in f576b17cd6ba653bdace1f0da9a3b57f4984e460 |
Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2016-03-16 16:09:40 | pgsql: Add word_similarity to pg_trgm contrib module. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Steele | 2016-03-16 16:13:07 | Re: PATCH: index-only scans with partial indexes |
Previous Message | David Steele | 2016-03-16 16:09:54 | Re: [PATH] Jsonb, insert a new value into an array at arbitrary position |