On 2016/02/04 21:57, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
One more: I think the following in postgresGetForeignJoinPaths() is a good idea, but I think it's okay to just check whether root->rowMarks is non-NIL, because that since we have rowmarks for all base relations except the target, if we have root->parse->commandType==CMD_DELETE (or root->parse->commandType==CMD_UPDATE), then there would be at least one non-target base relation in the joinrel, which would have a rowmark.
Sorry, I am unable to understand it fully. But what you are suggesting that if there are root->rowMarks, then we are sure that there is at least one base relation apart from the target, which needs locking rows. Even if we don't have one, still changes in a row of target relation after it was scanned, can result in firing EPQ check, which would need the local plan to be executed, thus even if root->rowMarks is NIL, EPQ check can fire and we will need alternate local plan.
Yeah, I think that is true, but if root->rowMarks==NIL, we won't have non-target foreign tables, and therefore postgresGetForeignJoinPaths() will never be called. No?
Best regards, Etsuro Fujita -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers