Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Yeah. An alternative definition that would support that would be to >> call the upper-path-providing callback for each FDW that's responsible >> for any base relation of the query. But I think that that would often >> lead to a lot of redundant/wasted computation, and it's not clear to >> me that we can support such cases without other changes as well.
> Sure, that's fine with me. Are you going to go make these changes now? Yeah, in a bit. > Eventually, we might just support a configurable flag on FDWs where > FDWs that want to do this sort of thing can request callbacks on every > join and every upper rel in the query. But that can wait. That'd be a possibility, too. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers