On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 8:38 AM Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.saw...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 13:53, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com > <tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Sawada san, > > > > > > I'm reviewing this patch series, and let me give some initial comments and > > questions. I'm looking at this with a hope that this will be useful purely > > as a FDW enhancement for our new use cases, regardless of whether the FDW > > will be used for Postgres scale-out. > > Thank you for reviewing this patch! > > Yes, this patch is trying to resolve the generic atomic commit problem > w.r.t. FDW, and will be useful also for Postgres scale-out. >
I think it is important to get a consensus on this point. If I understand correctly, Tsunakawa-San doesn't sound to be convinced that FDW can be used for postgres scale-out and we are trying to paint this feature as a step forward in the scale-out direction. As per my understanding, we don't have a very clear vision whether we will be able to achieve the other important aspects of scale-out feature like global visibility if we go in this direction and that is the reason I have insisted in this and the other related thread [1] to at least have a high-level idea of the same before going too far with this patch. It is quite possible that after spending months of efforts to straighten out this patch/feature, we came to the conclusion that this need to be re-designed or requires a lot of re-work to ensure that it can be extended for global visibility. It is better to spend some effort up front to see if the proposed patch is a stepping stone for achieving what we want w.r.t postgres scale-out. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/07b2c899-4ed0-4c87-1327-23c750311248%40postgrespro.ru -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
