Re: The case when AsyncAppend exists also in the qual of Async ForeignScan

>> I think it can be done, but only as a temporary solution.
> My concern about that is that such an inconsistency would make the
> code complicated, and thus make the maintenance hard.
Agree, but your new patch is quite understandable.

>> Maybe we can split async logic into:
>> - receiving stage, when we only fetch and store tuples,
>> - evaluating stage, when we form resulting tuple and return by a
scan >> node.
>> I will think about such solution more.
> One simple solution along this line I came up with, which is not the
> rewrite, is to 1) split process_pending_request() into the two steps,
> and 2) postpone the second step until we are called from
> postgresForeignAsyncConfigureWait(), like the attached, which I think
> would be much consistent with the existing logic.
Good idea. Are you planning to commit this patch?

>> Also, may be you tell your opinion about an additional optimization
>> of Async Append [1]?
> Is the optimization related to this issue? (Sorry, I didn’t have time
> for reviewing the patch in [1] than expected. I plan to do so next
> month.)
This optimization tries to postpone choice of async subplans. It allows
us to make a decision on async capable subplans after all plan
flattening operations.

--
regards,
Andrey Lepikhov
Postgres Professional