> On 08 Apr 2017, at 16:14, David Steele wrote:
>
> On 3/22/17 6:20 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> On 2017/02/22 19:57, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>>> Marked this as Ready for Committer.
>>
>> I noticed that this item in the CF app was incorrectly marked as
>> Committed. This patch isn't committed, so
On 3/22/17 6:20 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2017/02/22 19:57, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>> Marked this as Ready for Committer.
>
> I noticed that this item in the CF app was incorrectly marked as
> Committed. This patch isn't committed, so I returned it to the previous
> status. I also rebased the
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2017/02/22 19:57, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>> Marked this as Ready for Committer.
>
> I noticed that this item in the CF app was incorrectly marked as Committed.
> This patch isn't committed, so I returned it to the previous status. I also
>
On 2017/02/22 19:57, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
Marked this as Ready for Committer.
I noticed that this item in the CF app was incorrectly marked as
Committed. This patch isn't committed, so I returned it to the previous
status. I also rebased the patch. Attached is a new version of the patch.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2017/02/21 19:31, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Etsuro Fujita
>> mailto:fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp>> wrote:
>>
>
> On 2017/02/13 18:24, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>> Here are few comments:
>>
>>
On 2017/02/21 19:31, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Etsuro Fujita
mailto:fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp>> wrote:
On 2017/02/13 18:24, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
Here are few comments:
1)
@@ -211,6 +211,12 @@ typedef struct PgFdwDirectModifyState
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2017/02/13 18:24, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>
>> I started reviewing the patch again. Patch applied cleanly on latest
>> source
>> as well as regression pass through with the patch. I also performed
>> few manual testing and haven't found any
On 2017/02/13 18:24, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
I started reviewing the patch again. Patch applied cleanly on latest source
as well as regression pass through with the patch. I also performed
few manual testing and haven't found any regression. Patch look
much cleaner the earlier version, and don't ha
Sorry for delay in the review.
I started reviewing the patch again. Patch applied cleanly on latest source
as well as regression pass through with the patch. I also performed
few manual testing and haven't found any regression. Patch look
much cleaner the earlier version, and don't have any major
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> Attached is the new version of the patch. I also addressed other comments
> from you: moved rewriting the fdw_scan_tlist to postgres_fdw.c,
> added/revised comments, and added regression tests for the case where a
> pushed down UPDATE/DELETE
On 2016/11/30 17:29, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2016/11/23 20:28, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
I wrote:
How about inserting that before the
out param **retrieved_attrs, like this?
static void
deparseExplicitTargetList(List *tlist,
bool is_returning,
On 2016/11/23 20:28, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Etsuro Fujita
mailto:fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp>> wrote:
1)
-static void deparseExplicitTargetList(List *tlist, List
**retrieved_attrs,
+static void deparseExplicitTargetList(bool is_re
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> Hi Rushabh,
>
> On 2016/11/22 19:05, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>
>> I started reviewing the patch and here are few initial review points and
>> questions for you.
>>
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> 1)
>> -static void deparseExplicitTargetList(Lis
Hi Rushabh,
On 2016/11/22 19:05, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
I started reviewing the patch and here are few initial review points and
questions for you.
Thanks for the review!
1)
-static void deparseExplicitTargetList(List *tlist, List **retrieved_attrs,
+static void deparseExplicitTargetList(bool
I started reviewing the patch and here are few initial review points and
questions for you.
1)
-static void deparseExplicitTargetList(List *tlist, List **retrieved_attrs,
+static void deparseExplicitTargetList(bool is_returning,
+ List *tlist,
+ Li
On 2016/11/16 16:38, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2016/11/16 13:10, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
I don't see any reason why DML/UPDATE pushdown should depend upon
subquery deparsing or least PHV patch. Combined together they can help
in more cases, but without those patches, we will be able to push-down
mor
On 2016/11/16 13:10, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
On 2016/11/15 19:04, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
Your latest patch doesn't not get apply cleanly apply on master branch.
Did you apply the patch set in [1] (postgres-fdw-subquery-support-v4.patch
and
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2016/11/15 19:04, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Fujita-san for working on this. I've signed up to review this
>> patch.
>
>
> Thank you for reviewing the patch!
>
>> Your latest patch doesn't not get apply cleanly apply on master bran
On 2016/11/15 19:04, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
Thanks Fujita-san for working on this. I've signed up to review this patch.
Thank you for reviewing the patch!
Your latest patch doesn't not get apply cleanly apply on master branch.
Did you apply the patch set in [1]
(postgres-fdw-subquery-suppor
Thanks Fujita-san for working on this. I've signed up to review this patch.
Your latest patch doesn't not get apply cleanly apply on master branch.
patching file contrib/postgres_fdw/deparse.c
6 out of 17 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
contrib/postgres_fdw/deparse.c.rej
patching file cont
On 2016/09/08 19:55, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2016/09/07 13:21, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
* with the patch:
postgres=# explain verbose delete from ft1 using ft2 where ft1.a =
ft2.a;
QUERY PLAN
--
On 2016/09/07 13:21, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
* with the patch:
postgres=# explain verbose delete from ft1 using ft2 where ft1.a =
ft2.a;
QUERY PLAN
-
Thanks Fujita-san for working on this.
> * with the patch:
> postgres=# explain verbose delete from ft1 using ft2 where ft1.a = ft2.a;
> QUERY PLAN
>
> ---
23 matches
Mail list logo
