Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pMX2O-0003t5-9n for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:29:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pMX2M-0006dy-Mu for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:29:42 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pMX2M-0006dh-ED for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:29:42 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pMX2F-0003Ta-Tl for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:29:41 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 30UGTXND490924; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:29:33 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Joe Conway cc: Bruce Momjian , Pete Storer , "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: FW: Query execution failure In-reply-to: References: <2957101.1674746628@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2961799.1674749201@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Joe Conway message dated "Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:16:03 -0500" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <490922.1675096173.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:29:33 -0500 Message-ID: <490923.1675096173@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Joe Conway writes: > Also I have been told (not verified by me) that MySQL at least supports > using its own built-in collation. If so, how can we ever know that > whatever Postgres is using will match that? Ugh. mysql_fdw probably ought to default to no-sort-pushdown. > I wonder if we should have an attribute of a foreign server that > indicates whether sort pushdown is enabled or not. This is something that would have to be implemented individually by each FDW for which it's relevant. We could set a good precedent, and perhaps standardize the option name, by doing that in postgres_fdw. regards, tom lane