Re: cross-db queries (was Are we losing momentum?)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Darko Prenosil <darko(dot)prenosil(at)finteh(dot)hr>, hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: cross-db queries (was Are we losing momentum?)
Date: 2003-04-16 17:35:45
Message-ID: 29147.1050514545@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Darko Prenosil wrote:
>> Unfortunately any other way ends up with first selecting *ALL* records from
>> host ! If there is no such limitation I'll be pretty satisfied with dblink,
>> and will newer ask for "cross-db-queries" again !!!

> Yeah, this is why a proper implementation following the spec is needed.
> If the external access was part of the backend, then the planner could
> be taught to push down qualifiers to the external source where
> appropriate (I think -- maybe Tom will comment on this).

Yes, the newer version of SQL-MED has APIs that allow this sort of thing
to be done. Of course, it's another huge chunk of work beyond basic
SQL-MED ... but at least the roadmap is there, and when we get to the
end of the road we might even find other DBMSes that can speak the same
language. If we invent our own spec the chance of handling cross-DBMS
queries intelligently is nil :-(

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-04-16 17:41:08 Re: encoding question
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-04-16 17:29:01 Re: Many comments (related to "Are we losing momentum?")