| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "Etsuro Fujita *EXTERN*" <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Shigeru Hanada *EXTERN*" <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW |
| Date: | 2014-08-27 14:05:57 |
| Message-ID: | 29868.1409148357@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Hmm, I'm worried that may be an API contract violation.
> Indeed it is. You could get away with it if you check the
> EXEC_FLAG_EXPLAIN_ONLY flag before doing anything with visible
> side-effects, but it's still pretty ugly.
Actually, there's another problem there. What of UPDATE or DELETE with a
LIMIT clause, which is something that seems to be coming down the pike:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1550
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-08-27 14:12:35 | Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-08-27 14:04:06 | Re: replication commands and log_statements |