From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Shohei Mochizuki <shohei(dot)mochizuki(at)toshiba(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BEFORE UPDATE trigger on postgres_fdw table not work |
Date: | 2019-05-28 04:23:49 |
Message-ID: | 600f7f96-3844-c5fb-9d29-60408ae0095e@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Mochizuki-san,
On 2019/05/28 13:10, Shohei Mochizuki wrote:
> On 2019/05/28 12:54, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2019/05/27 22:02, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Perhaps, if the table has relevant BEFORE triggers, we should just abandon
>>> our attempts to optimize away fetching/storing all columns? It seems like
>>> another potential hazard here is a trigger needing to read a column that
>>> is not mentioned in the SQL query.
>>
>> The fetching side is fine, because rewriteTargetListUD() adds a
>> whole-row-var to the target list when the UPDATE / DELETE target is a
>> foreign table *and* there is a row trigger on the table. postgres_fdw
>> sees that and constructs the query to fetch all columns.
>>
>> So, the only problem here is the optimizing away of storing all columns,
>> which the Mochizuki-san's patch seems enough to fix.
>
> Amit-san, Tom,
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> I checked other scenario. If a foreign table has AFTER trigger, remote update
> query must return all columns and these cases are added at
> deparseReturningList
> and covered by following existing test cases.
>
> EXPLAIN (verbose, costs off)
> UPDATE rem1 set f2 = ''; -- can't be pushed down
> QUERY PLAN
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Update on public.rem1
> Remote SQL: UPDATE public.loc1 SET f2 = $2 WHERE ctid = $1 RETURNING
> f1, f2
> -> Foreign Scan on public.rem1
> Output: f1, ''::text, ctid, rem1.*
> Remote SQL: SELECT f1, f2, ctid FROM public.loc1 FOR UPDATE
> (5 rows)
Ah, I had missed the AFTER triggers case, which seems to be working fine
as you've shown here.
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2019-05-28 04:56:29 | Re: Excessive memory usage in multi-statement queries w/ partitioning |
Previous Message | Shohei Mochizuki | 2019-05-28 04:10:45 | Re: BEFORE UPDATE trigger on postgres_fdw table not work |