On 2015/09/03 19:25, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2015/09/03 14:22, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> On 2015/09/03 9:41, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> That having been said, I don't entirely like Fujita-san's patch
>>> either. Much of the new code is called immediately adjacent to an FDW
>>> callback which could pretty trivially do the same thing itself, if
>>> needed.
>> Another idea about that code is to call that code in eg, ExecProcNode,
>> instead of calling ExecForeignScan there. I think that that might be
>> much cleaner and resolve the naming problem below.
> I gave it another thought; the following changes to ExecInitNode would
> make the patch much simpler, ie, we would no longer need to call the new
> code in ExecInitForeignScan, ExecForeignScan, ExecEndForeignScan, and
> ExecReScanForeignScan. I think that would resolve the name problem also.
I'm attaching an updated version of the patch. The patch is based on
the SS_finalize_plan patch that has been recently committed. I'd be
happy if this helps people discuss more about how to fix this issue.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
