| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Maksim Milyutin <milyutinma(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Add support for tuple routing to foreign partitions |
| Date: | 2018-03-23 12:56:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYanJY_2n_878U_59+ONQ-WNth6Jsw-KvfxfY96+78U+Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:22 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I think for bulk
>> inserts we'll need an API that says "here's a row, store it or buffer
>> it as you like" and then another API that says "flush any buffered
>> rows to the actual table and perform any necessary cleanup". Or maybe
>> in postgres_fdw the first API could start a COPY if not already done
>> and send the row, and the second one could end the COPY.
> That's really what I have in mind.
So let's do it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2018-03-23 13:18:09 | Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |
| Previous Message | Jim Finnerty | 2018-03-23 12:42:47 | Re: Removing useless DISTINCT clauses |