On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > Ah sorry, I was wrong about remote_conds. remote_conds and local_conds > are basically the conditions on the relation being pushed down. > havingQuals are conditions on a grouped relation so treating them like > baserestrictinfo or join conditions looks more straight forward, > rather than having a separate member in PgFdwRelationInfo. So, remote > havingQuals go into remote_conds and local havingQuals go to > local_conds.
Looks like we already do that. Then we have remote_conds, local_conds which together should be equivalent to havingQual. Storing all those three doesn't make sense. In future someone may use havingQual instead of remote_conds/local_conds just because its available and then there is risk of these three lists going out of sync.
Yep, I see the risk.
-- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company
--
Jeevan Chalke Technical Architect, Product Development EnterpriseDB Corporation The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
