| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Varying results when using merge joins over postgres_fdw vs hash joins |
| Date: | 2017-09-20 22:30:00 |
| Message-ID: | bb0ff497-7ac9-6a61-ed7b-3663516ac659@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/20/17 12:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm tempted to propose that we invent some kind of "unknown"
> collation, which the planner would have to be taught to not equate to any
> other column collation (not even other instances of "unknown"), and that
> postgres_fdw's IMPORT ought to label remote columns with that collation
> unless specifically told to do otherwise. Then it's on the user's head
> if he tells us to do the wrong thing; but we won't produce incorrect
> plans by default.
OID 0 might already work that way, depending on the details.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-20 22:34:47 | Re: compress method for spgist - 2 |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-20 22:13:02 | Re: Windows warnings from VS 2017 |