On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:32 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Etsuro Fujita > <fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> Sorry, my explanation might be not enough, but I'm not saying to hide the >> subplan. I think it would be better to show the subplan somewhere in the >> EXPLAIN outout, but I'm not sure that it's a good idea to show that in the >> current form. We have two plan trees; one for normal query execution and >> another for EvalPlanQual testing. I think it'd be better to show the >> EXPLAIN output the way that allows users to easily identify each of the plan >> trees. > > It's hard to do that because we don't identify that internally > anywhere. Like I said before, the possibility of a ForeignScan having > an outer subplan is formally independent of the new EPQ stuff, and I'd > prefer to maintain that separation and just address this with > documentation.
Fujita-san, others, could this be addressed with documentation? > Getting this bug fixed has been one of the more exhausting experiences > of my involvement with PostgreSQL, and to be honest, I think I'd like > to stop spending too much time on this now and work on getting the > feature that this is intended to support working. Right now, the only > people who can have an opinion on this topic are those who are > following this thread in detail, and there really aren't that many of > those. I am numbering that to mainly 3 people, you included :) > If we get the feature - join pushdown for postgres_fdw - > working, then we might get some feedback from users about what they > like about it or don't, and certainly if this is a frequent complaint > then that bolsters the case for doing something about it, and possibly > also helps us figure out what that thing should be. On the other > hand, if we don't get the feature because we're busy debating > interface details related to this patch, then none of these details > matter anyway because nobody except developer is actually running the > code in question. As this debate continues, I think that moving this patch to the next CF would make the most sense then.. So done this way. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers