Fujita-san,
On 2016/04/20 16:20, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2016/04/18 17:31, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Is the following description now outdated:
>>
>> "ForeignPath represents a potential scan of a foreign table"
>>
>> Considering that there now exists FdwRoutine.GetForeignJoinPaths() whose
>> product is nothing else but a ForeignPath, should it now say (patch
>> attached):
>>
>> "ForeignPath represents a potential scan of foreign table(s)"
>>
>> Or something better.
>
> I think it'd be better to match the comment with that for
> create_foreignscan_path(). So how about "ForeignPath represents a
> potential scan of a foreign table, foreign join, or foreign upper-relation
> processing"? I think we would probably need to update the comment in
> src/backend/optimizer/README (L358), too.
That's a lot better. Updated patch attached.
Thanks,
Amit
