On 12/14/2011 09:02 AM, Shigeru Hanada wrote: > Here I'd like to propose three incremental patches: > > 1) fdw_helper_funcs_v3.patch...: This is not specific to pgsql_fdw, but > probably useful for every FDWs which use FDW options... > 2) pgsql_fdw_v5.patch: This patch provides simple pgsql_fdw > which does *NOT* support any push-down... > 3) pgsql_fdw_pushdown_v1.patch: This patch adds limited push-down > capability to pgsql_fdw which is implemented by previous patch... > ... > To implement [expression which uses user-defined function], I added > exprFunction to nodefuncs.c which returns Oid > of function which is used in the expression node, but I'm not sure that > it should be there. Should we have it inside pgsql_fdw?
After failing to bring some light onto this during my general update, will try again here. We now have 3 updated patches that refactor things from how this was originally presented, with one asked implementation question. There's also a spawned off "Join push-down for foreign tables" patch off in another thread. I don't think it's really clear to everyone what state this feature proposal is in. We've gotten bits of review here from KaiGai and Heikki, big picture comments from Robert and Tom. Given how these are structured, is fdw_helper_funcs_v3.patch at the point where it should be considered for committer review? Maybe pgsql_fdw_v5.patch too? The others seem to be more in flux to me, due to all the recent pushdown changes. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US g...@2ndquadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers