Re: Push down more UPDATEs/DELETEs in postgres_fdw

From: Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Push down more UPDATEs/DELETEs in postgres_fdw
Date: 2016-11-18 03:26:06
Message-ID: b47994b6-6c50-7d63-bc39-e53042694e57@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016/11/16 16:38, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2016/11/16 13:10, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> I don't see any reason why DML/UPDATE pushdown should depend upon
>> subquery deparsing or least PHV patch. Combined together they can help
>> in more cases, but without those patches, we will be able to push-down
>> more stuff. Probably, we should just restrict push-down only for the
>> cases when above patches are not needed. That makes reviews easy. Once
>> those patches get committed, we may add more functionality depending
>> upon the status of this patch. Does that make sense?

> OK, I'll extract from the patch the minimal part that wouldn't depend on
> the two patches.

Here is a patch for that. Todo items are: (1) add more comments and (2)
add more regression tests. I'll do that in the next version.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

Attachment Content-Type Size
postgres-fdw-more-update-pushdown-v1.patch application/x-patch 42.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua Drake 2016-11-18 03:43:21 Re: Mail thread references in commits
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2016-11-18 03:08:20 Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level.