On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: >> As I mentioned >> up-thread, I'd really like to see FDW join push-down, FDW aggregate >> push-down, parallel query execution, and parallel remote-FDW execution >> and I don't see this CustomScan approach as the right answer to any of >> those. > > In accordance with the above, what I'd like to see with this patch is > removal of the postgres_fdw changes and any changes which were for that > support. In addition, I'd like to understand why 'ctidscan' makes any > sense to have as an example of what to use this for- if that's valuable, > why wouldn't we simply implement that in core? I do want an example in > contrib of how to properly use this capability, but I don't think that's > it.
I suggested that example to KaiGai at last year's PGCon. It may indeed be something we want to have in core, but right now we don't. More generally, I think this discussion is focusing on the wrong set of issues. The threshold issue for this patch is whether there is a set of hook points that enable a workable custom-scan functionality, and whether KaiGai has correctly identified them. In other words, I think we should be worrying about whether KaiGai's found all of the places that need to be modified to support a custom scan, and whether the modifications he's made to each of those places are correct and adequate. Whether he's picked the best possible example does not strike me as a matter of principal concern, and it's far too late to tell him he's got to go pick a different one at this point anyway. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
