> > On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Kouhei Kaigai <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote: > > > The attached patch is an adjusted version of the previous one. > > > Even though it co-exists a new callback and fdw_recheck_quals, > > > the callback is kicked first as follows. > > > > This seems excessive to me: why would we need an arbitrary-length list > > of plans for an FDW? I think we should just allow an outer child and > > an inner child, which is probably one more than we'll ever need in > > practice. > > > It just intends to keep code symmetry with custom-scan case, so not > a significant reason. > And, I expected ForeignScan will also need multiple sub-plans soon > to support more intelligent push-down like: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/9A28C8860F777E439AA12E8AEA7694F8010F47D > a...@bpxm15gp.gisp.nec.co.jp > > It is a separate discussion, of course, so I don't have strong preference > here. > > > This looks like an independent bug fix: > > > > + fscan->fdw_recheck_quals = (List *) > > + fix_upper_expr(root, > > + (Node *) > > fscan->fdw_recheck_quals, > > + itlist, > > + INDEX_VAR, > > + rtoffset); > > pfree(itlist); > > > > If so, it should be committed separately and back-patched to 9.5. > > > OK, I'll split the patch into two. > The attached patch is the portion cut from the previous EPQ recheck patch.
Regarding of the fdw_plans or fdw_plan, I'll follow your suggestion. Thanks, -- NEC Business Creation Division / PG-Strom Project KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com>
pgsql-bugfix-fdw_recheck_quals-on-setrefs.patch
Description: pgsql-bugfix-fdw_recheck_quals-on-setrefs.patch
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
