From: | "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Attaching database |
Date: | 2020-10-25 18:26:53 |
Message-ID: | 20201025182653.GA11390@hjp.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2020-10-19 20:21:05 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> po 19. 10. 2020 v 20:18 odesílatel Igor Korot <ikorot01(at)gmail(dot)com> napsal:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:51 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > It is a different thing - postgresql_fdw does nested connect - it uses
> > client-server protocol.
> >
> > For postgres connect and sql engine process is one entity - and engine is
> > written without a possibility to reconnect to another database.
>
> So if I understand correctly the postgresql_fdw is creating a second
> connection and uses it as kind of "virtualizing mechanism"
> in order to give access to the second database.
>
>
> yes - it does new connect to somewhere (local or remote server, but mechanism
> is absolutely same)
In case this isn't clear:
It is the server (or more specifically, the foreign data wrapper) which
opens that connection. To the client it looks like it's just accessing a
normal table within the same database.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | hjp(at)hjp(dot)at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ayub M | 2020-10-26 02:52:18 | Re: postgres materialized view refresh performance |
Previous Message | Andreas Kretschmer | 2020-10-25 11:07:27 | Re: Feature Requests |