Re: postgres_fdw could deparse ArrayCoerceExpr

From: Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Pyhalov <a(dot)pyhalov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw could deparse ArrayCoerceExpr
Date: 2025-07-18 14:33:50
Message-ID: CAHewXNn=_ykCtcTw5SCfZ-eVr4m+Cuc804rGeMsKuj=D4xpL4w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> 于2025年7月16日周三 05:56写道:

> On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 11:52 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 6:15 PM Alexander Pyhalov
> > <a(dot)pyhalov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> > > Alexander Korotkov писал(а) 2025-06-04 14:29:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 11:59 AM Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> One important note here. This patch will change cast behaviour in
> case
> > > >> of local and foreign types are mismatched.
> > > >> The problem is if we cannot convert types locally, this does not
> mean
> > > >> that it is also true for a foreign wrapped data.
> > > >> In any case, it's up to the committer to decide whether this change
> is
> > > >> needed or not.
> > > >
> > > > I have two question regarding this aspect.
> > > > 1) Is it the same with regular type conversion?
> > >
> > > Yes, it's the same.
> > >
> > > CREATE TYPE enum_of_int_like AS enum('1', '2', '3', '4');
> > > CREATE TABLE conversions(id int, d enum_of_int_like);
> > > CREATE FOREIGN TABLE ft_conversions (id int, d char(1))
> > > SERVER loopback options (table_name 'conversions');
> > > SET plan_cache_mode = force_generic_plan;
> > > PREPARE s(varchar) AS SELECT count(*) FROM ft_conversions where d=$1;
> > > EXPLAIN (VERBOSE, COSTS OFF)
> > > EXECUTE s('1');
> > > QUERY PLAN
> > >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Foreign Scan
> > > Output: (count(*))
> > > Relations: Aggregate on (public.ft_conversions)
> > > Remote SQL: SELECT count(*) FROM public.conversions WHERE ((d =
> > > $1::character varying))
> > > (4 rows)
> > >
> > > EXECUTE s('1');
> > > ERROR: operator does not exist: public.enum_of_int_like = character
> > > varying
> > > HINT: No operator matches the given name and argument types. You might
> > > need to add explicit type casts.
> > >
> > > > 2) Can we fallback to remote type conversion in local type conversion
> > > > fails?
> > >
> > > It's the opposite - we've already planned (and deparsed) statement,
> > > using remote type conversion.
> > > When plan execution fails, there's nothing we can do.
> > > We'll get
> > >
> > > PREPARE s(varchar[]) AS SELECT count(*) FROM ft_conversions where
> > > d=ANY($1);
> > > EXPLAIN (VERBOSE, COSTS OFF)
> > > EXECUTE s(ARRAY['1','2']);
> > > QUERY PLAN
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Foreign Scan
> > > Output: (count(*))
> > > Relations: Aggregate on (public.ft_conversions)
> > > Remote SQL: SELECT count(*) FROM public.conversions WHERE ((d = ANY
> > > ($1::character varying[])))
> > > (4 rows)
> > >
> > > EXECUTE s(ARRAY['1','2']);
> > > ERROR: operator does not exist: public.enum_of_int_like = character
> > > varying
> > > HINT: No operator matches the given name and argument types. You might
> > > need to add explicit type casts.
> >
> > Got it, thank you for the explanation. I thin it's fair that array
> > coercion works the same way as a regular cast.
>
> I've written a commit message for this patch. I'm going to push this
> if no objections.
>

Hi Alexander,

I found a little typo in this commit. Other places use "an"
before ArrayCoerceExpr.
To be consistent may be better. So, please take a look at the attached
patch.

--
Thanks,
Tender Wang

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0001-Fix-a-typo.patch text/plain 782 bytes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message feichanghong 2025-07-18 14:37:56 Even when the data is already ordered, MergeAppend still adds a Sort node
Previous Message Tom Lane 2025-07-18 14:12:17 Re: Lossless transmission of double precision floating point