From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Shigeru HANADA <hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SQL/MED with simple wrappers |
Date: | 2010-10-25 13:05:51 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTingUR2OEBdh3syXdfefdSm+RYt48iTYxSPY7TEs@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello
> 4) List of foreign connections
> Users (especially DBAs?) might want to see list of foreign connections.
> Currently postgresql_fdw provides its own connection list via
> postgresql_fdw_connections view. Common view such as
> pg_foreign_connections would be needed? If so, function which returns
> list of active connections would be necessary in FDW API.
>
+ list of foreign tables?
> 5) Routine mapping
> If a function in local query can be evaluated on the remote side in
> same semantics, it seems efficient to push the function down to the
> remote side. But how can we know whether the function can be pushed
> down or not? For such purpose, SQL/MED standard defines "routine
> mapping". Should we implement routine mapping?
>
is it related to aggregate functions? If yes, this it can be really
significant help
>
> 7) Using cursor in postgresql_fdw
> postgresql_fdw fetches all of the result tuples from the foreign
> server in the first pgIterate() call. It could cause out-of-memory if
> the result set was huge. If libpq supports protocol-level cursor,
> postgresql_fdw will be able to divide result set into some sets and
> lower the usage of memory. Or should we use declare implicit cursor
> with DECLARE statement? One connection can be used by multiple
> ForeignScan nodes in a local query alternately. An issue is that
> cursor requires implicit transaction block. Is it OK to start
> transaction automatically?
I don't know why DECLARE statement is problem? Can you explain it, please.
regards
Pavel Stehule
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-10-25 13:33:04 | Re: find -path isn't portable |
Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2010-10-25 12:51:28 | Re: security hook on authorization |