Re: Oddity in handling of cached plans for FDW queries - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Oddity in handling of cached plans for FDW queries
Date
Msg-id 2270.1468550932@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Oddity in handling of cached plans for FDW queries  (Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: Oddity in handling of cached plans for FDW queries  (Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> One thing I'm not sure about is: should we insist that a join can be  
> pushed down only if the checkAsUser fields of the relevant RTEs are  
> equal in the case where user mappings are meaningless to the FDW, like  
> file_fdw?

If we add a mechanism to let us know that the FDW doesn't care, we could
relax the requirement for such cases.  I don't have a strong opinion on
whether that's worthwhile.  It'd depend in part on how many FDWs there
are that don't care, versus those that do; and I have no idea about that.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Oddity in handling of cached plans for FDW queries
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: trivia: cancel{,l}{ed,ing,ation}