From: Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: Shigeru Hanada <shigeru.hanada@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: inherit support for foreign tables
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 11:15:06 +0900
Message-ID: <548509AA.2090305@lab.ntt.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141206170216.GA14211@fetter.org>
References: <545CB4A2.1030303@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<CAFjFpRcVLtU6jE8h_N1Rc+Y-pDFbmR7YvBvxOXg6aTFrbZ1Z8Q@mail.gmail.com>
<54645499.7050709@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<CAFjFpRcBFVO0YP0nmfygpJOFfWKMkAN1Z8JmrkwyEWXDyMt5Hw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFjFpRcd=F8Jqx+9yioHKVUA71LXBxO41ia61acjzyzQ4MZqVQ@mail.gmail.com>
<5476FB4B.9060705@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<CAFjFpRd6PR3Seg8D3t-XcXGxXyb+p2WDsk_wBGge7b=PyzP_Qw@mail.gmail.com>
<547D2B1D.1080107@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<CAFjFpRcYN5pMphZ=ATPh9Ya6X4h+fX0LVv1nG9fJZKpL2kopeA@mail.gmail.com>
<547FD69A.8090308@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<20141206170216.GA14211@fetter.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
(2014/12/07 2:02), David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 12:35:54PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> But I think
>> there would be another idea. An example will be shown below. We show the
>> update commands below the ModifyTable node, not above the corresponding
>> ForeignScan nodes, so maybe less confusing. If there are no objections of
>> you and others, I'll update the patch this way.
>>
>> postgres=# explain verbose update parent set a = a * 2 where a = 5;
>> QUERY PLAN
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Update on public.parent (cost=0.00..280.77 rows=25 width=10)
>> On public.ft1
>> Remote SQL: UPDATE public.mytable_1 SET a = $2 WHERE ctid = $1
> ^^^^^^^^^^
> It occurs to me that the command generated by the FDW might well not
> be SQL at all, as is the case with file_fdw and anything else that
> talks to a NoSQL engine.
>
> Would it be reasonable to call this "Remote command" or something
> similarly generic?
Yeah, but I'd like to propose that this line is shown by the FDW API
(ie, ExplainForeignModify) as in non-inherited update cases, so that the
FDW developer can choose the right name. As for "On public.ft1", I'd
like to propose that the FDW API also show that by calling a function
for that introduced into the PG core (Would it be better to use "For"
rather than "On"?).
Sorry, my explanation was not enough.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp, david@fetter.org, ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com, horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp, hlinnakangas@vmware.com, noah@leadboat.com, shigeru.hanada@gmail.com
Subject: Re: inherit support for foreign tables
In-Reply-To: <548509AA.2090305@lab.ntt.co.jp>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox