Feedback-ID: i0fe9450f:Fastmail
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:15:08 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>,
	Etsuro Fujita <efujita@postgresql.org>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: postgres_fdw: Inherit the local transaction's
 access/deferrable
Message-ID: <aZJvnGgG95_Rs1Il@paquier.xyz>
References: <E1uLe9X-000zsY-2g@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <ed2296f1-1a6b-4932-b870-5bb18c2591ae@oss.nttdata.com>
 <aD0bg6Km5IigzUkC@paquier.xyz>
 <CAPmGK17Vf4fWt=+kCZ8V3JP7jO6iMrUze7TjOVtGzZwNbevnwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <b269f7ad-90a7-4217-a58e-038899148718@oss.nttdata.com>
 <CAPmGK14yYoO2iBg7SoT3WdnAKoCpWy_LPdoTDepJ21-Yf8TiKA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="i2t/7w9cUAEqUgQe"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPmGK14yYoO2iBg7SoT3WdnAKoCpWy_LPdoTDepJ21-Yf8TiKA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aZJvnGgG95_Rs1Il%40paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


--i2t/7w9cUAEqUgQe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Feb 15, 2026 at 05:40:13PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> This patch 1) modifies postgres_fdw so that it opens remote
> transactions in read-only mode if the corresponding local transaction
> is read-only, as noted in the documentation, but 2) keeps the existing
> behavior of login triggers that they can write even if the invoking
> transaction is read-only.  So declaring a transaction as read-only on
> the local side doesn't mean it blocks all write operations on the
> remote side; it still allows login triggers invoked on the remote side
> to write.  Considering typical use-cases of such triggers, this seems
> reasonable to me.  I think it might be a good idea to add a note about
> it to the documentation, though.
>=20
> I'd like to re-propose this patch for v19, as mentioned in this thread.

Considering again that for v19 sounds like a sensible thing to do.
Before feature freeze, not after.  :D
--
Michael

--i2t/7w9cUAEqUgQe
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=arB5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--i2t/7w9cUAEqUgQe--