From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW |
Date: | 2015-11-25 11:36:48 |
Message-ID: | CAA-aLv5x4+6P2rXTR0uOojdC6x+vZom05JwGPU5KiYJUhP9gQQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13 May 2015 at 04:10, Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> On 2015/05/13 0:55, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>
>> Etsuro,
>>
>> * Etsuro Fujita (fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp) wrote:
>>>
>>> Here is an updated version. In this version, the bug has been
>>> fixed, but any regression tests for that hasn't been added, because
>>> I'm not sure that the above way is a good idea and don't have any
>>> other ideas.
>>>
>>> The EXPLAIN output has also been improved as discussed in [1].
>>
>>
>> While the EXPLAIN output changed, the structure hasn't really changed
>> from what was discussed previously and there's not been any real
>> involvment from the core code in what's happening here.
>>
>> Clearly, the documentation around how to use the FDW API hasn't changed
>> at all and there's been no additions to it for handling bulk work.
>> Everything here continues to be done inside of postgres_fdw, which
>> essentially ignores the prescribed "Update/Delete one tuple" interface
>> for ExecForeignUpdate/ExecForeignDelete.
>>
>> I've spent the better part of the past two days trying to reason my way
>> around that while reviewing this patch and I haven't come out the other
>> side any happier with this approach than I was back in
>> 20140911153049(dot)GC16422(at)tamriel(dot)snowman(dot)net(dot)
>>
>> There are other things that don't look right to me, such as what's going
>> on at the bottom of push_update_down(), but I don't think there's much
>> point going into it until we figure out what the core FDW API here
>> should look like. It might not be all that far from what we have now,
>> but I don't think we can just ignore the existing, documented, API.
>
>
> OK, I'll try to introduce the core FDW API for this (and make changes to the
> core code) to address your previous comments.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to review the patch!
Fujita-san,
I'm a bit behind in reading up on this, so maybe it's been covered
since, but is there a discussion of this API on another thread, or a
newer patch available?
Thanks
Thom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2015-11-25 12:10:51 | Re: Using quicksort for every external sort run |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2015-11-25 10:27:10 | Re: problem with msvc linker - cannot build orafce |