Re: Postgres_FDW doc doesn't specify TYPE support in Remote Execution Options

From: Rajan Pandey <rajanpandey2508(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres_FDW doc doesn't specify TYPE support in Remote Execution Options
Date: 2024-04-09 14:36:00
Message-ID: CAPr50MmFF3aBT-=KauNR9KwX_bkXpCqgj9RKxv5WVVvTKxLzpw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs pgsql-general

Hi team 😃.

In the
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/postgres-fdw.html#POSTGRES-FDW-OPTIONS-REMOTE-EXECUTION
doc, it
mentions that Immutable Functions and Hi can be pushed down using
`extensions` option for foreign server.

But it does not mention TYPE. In the shippable.c
<https://doxygen.postgresql.org/shippable_8c_source.html>/lookup_shippable()
function, I found a comment that indicates that type is also pushed down.
Hece, I have removed TYPE from the comments, assuming that it does not make
sense to push down a data type, and only functions and operations can be
pushed down. Please let me know if my assumption is incorrect. 🙂

I have added my patch file with the mail. Thanks!

On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:06 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
wrote:

> On Tue, 2024-04-09 at 15:49 +0530, Rajan Pandey wrote:
> > I was reading
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/postgres-fdw.html#POSTGRES-FDW-OPTIONS-REMOTE-EXECUTION
> > and found that it mentions that Immutable Functions and Operators can
> > be pushed down using `extensions` option for foreign server.
> >
> > But it does not mention about TYPE. In the shippable.c/lookup_shippable()
> > function, I found that type is also pushed down.
>
> The comment only says that data types may be shippable, but not that
> they are actually shipped. Can you think of a case where a data type
> would be shipped to a foreign server? I wrote a foreign data wrapper,
> and I cannot think of such a case.
>
> Perhaps the function comment should be adjusted by removing the parenthesis
> or changing it to "(operator/function/...)".
>
> > Does this require updating the docs? Can I raise a PR to do so? Thank
> you! :)
>
> You would send a patch against the "master" branch to the pgsql-docs list
> for that.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>

--
Regards
Rajan Pandey

Attachment Content-Type Size
update_lookup_shippable_comments.patch application/octet-stream 503 bytes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2024-04-09 16:33:59 Re: psql option
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-04-09 14:26:27 Re: 8.14.5 jsonb subscripting

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sebastien Flaesch 2024-04-09 14:44:18 Re: prepared statement "cu1" already exists (but it does not)
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2024-04-09 14:28:53 Re: Regarding: Replication of TRUNCATE commands is not working