From: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, 花田茂 <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual |
Date: | 2015-10-05 08:55:37 |
Message-ID: | 56123B09.30906@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015/09/29 16:36, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> For the foreign table case (scanrelid>0), I imagined an approach
> different than yours. In that case, I thought the issue would be
> probably addressed by just modifying the remote query performed in
> RefetchForeignRow, which would be of the form "SELECT ctid, * FROM
> remote table WHERE ctid = $1", so that the modified query would be of
> the form "SELECT ctid, * FROM remote table WHERE ctid = $1 AND *remote
> quals*".
Sorry, I was wrong. I noticed that the modifieid query (that will be
sent to the remote server during postgresRefetchForeignRow) should be of
the form "SELECT * FROM (SELECT ctid, * FROM remote table WHERE ctid =
$1) ss WHERE *remote quals*". (I think the query of the form "SELECT
ctid, * FROM remote table WHERE ctid = $1 AND *remote quals*" would be
okay if using a TID scan on the remote side, though.)
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-10-05 10:04:15 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values. |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2015-10-05 08:42:49 | Re: No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!] |