Hi KaiGai-san,
Sorry about the delay in answering. I have been swamped with another thing
lately.
> BTW, your patch does not make sense in my environment that is just
> after initdb without any parameter customizing. Could you give us
> the step to reproduce the Nested-Loop plan from Hash-Join?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> Hanada-san,
>
> What about the status of your patch?
Sorry for absence. I have been struggling with connection recovery
issue, but I haven't fixed it yet. So I'd like to withdraw this patch
from this CF and mark it as "returned with feedbac
Hanada-san,
What about the status of your patch?
Even though the 1st commit-fest is getting closed soon,
I'd like to pay efforts for reviewing to pull up the status of
pgsql_fdw into "ready for committer" by beginning of the
upcoming commit-fest.
Thanks,
2012/7/13 Shigeru HANADA :
> (2012/07/12
2012/7/12 Etsuro Fujita :
>> 2012/6/26 Kohei KaiGai :
>> > Harada-san,
>> >
>> > I checked your patch, and had an impression that includes many
>> > improvements from the previous revision that I looked at the last
>> > commit fest.
>> >
>> > However, I noticed several points to be revised, or inve
On tor, 2012-07-12 at 19:44 +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
> Yes, I've proposed to rename existing postgresql_fdw_validator to
> dblink_fdw_validator and move it into contrib/dblink so that pgsql_fdw
> can use the name "postgresql_fdw" and "postgresql_fdw_validator".
I was somehow under the impressi
Hi Hanada-san,
> It would be possible to add some more features, such as ORDER BY
> push-down with index information support, without changing existing
> APIs, but at first add relatively simple pgsql_fdw and enhance it seems
> better. In addition, once pgsql_fdw has been merged, it would help
>
2012/7/13 Shigeru HANADA :
> (2012/07/12 20:48), Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> It seems to me what postgresql_fdw_validator() is doing looks like
>> a function to be named as "libpq_fdw_validator()".
>>
>> How about your opinion? It will help this namespace conflicts.
>
> I'd prefer dblink_fdw_validator.
(2012/07/12 20:48), Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> It seems to me what postgresql_fdw_validator() is doing looks like
> a function to be named as "libpq_fdw_validator()".
>
> How about your opinion? It will help this namespace conflicts.
I'd prefer dblink_fdw_validator.
The name "libpq_fdw_validator" imp
2012/7/12 Shigeru HANADA :
> (2012/07/12 6:04), Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On tor, 2012-06-14 at 21:29 +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
>>> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL, as a contrib module
>>> in core, again.
>>
>> Do you have any new proposals regarding naming, and how to deal wi
(2012/07/12 6:04), Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tor, 2012-06-14 at 21:29 +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
>> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL, as a contrib module
>> in core, again.
>
> Do you have any new proposals regarding naming, and how to deal with
> postgresql_fdw_validator, an
> 2012/6/26 Kohei KaiGai :
> > Harada-san,
> >
> > I checked your patch, and had an impression that includes many
> > improvements from the previous revision that I looked at the last
> > commit fest.
> >
> > However, I noticed several points to be revised, or investigated.
> >
> > * It seems to me
On tor, 2012-07-12 at 06:25 +0200, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> 2012/7/11 Peter Eisentraut :
> > On tor, 2012-06-14 at 21:29 +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
> >> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL, as a contrib module
> >> in core, again.
> >
> > Do you have any new proposals regarding naming,
2012/7/11 Peter Eisentraut :
> On tor, 2012-06-14 at 21:29 +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
>> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL, as a contrib module
>> in core, again.
>
> Do you have any new proposals regarding naming, and how to deal with
> postgresql_fdw_validator, and dblink?
>
Thi
On tor, 2012-06-14 at 21:29 +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL, as a contrib module
> in core, again.
Do you have any new proposals regarding naming, and how to deal with
postgresql_fdw_validator, and dblink?
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
2012/7/5 Shigeru HANADA :
>> In addition, is pull_var_clause() reasonable to list up all the attribute
>> referenced at the both expression tree? It seems to be pull_varattnos()
>> is more useful API in this situation.
>
> Only for searching, yes. However, sooner or later we need Var o
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> * Regarding to deparseSimpleSql(), it pulls attributes being referenced
> from baserestrictinfo and reltargetlist using pull_var_clause().
> Is it unavailable to use local_conds instead of baserestrictinfo?
> We can optimize ref
Hi Kaigai-san,
Sorry for delayed reply.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> * It seems to me expected results of the regression test is not
> attached, even though test cases were included. Please add it.
AFAICS the patch I posted contains both test script and expected res
Hanada-san,
Regarding to the issue around sub-transaction abort, an ideal
solution might be execution of SAVEPOINT command on remote
side synchronously. It allows to rollback the active transaction
into the savepoint on the remote server when local one get
rolled-back.
However, I'm not inclined to
Harada-san,
I checked your patch, and had an impression that includes many
improvements from the previous revision that I looked at the last
commit fest.
However, I noticed several points to be revised, or investigated.
* It seems to me expected results of the regression test is not
attached,
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> Let me push the pgsql_fdw in core from different perspective.
>
> Right now, FDW is a feature that will take many enhancement in
> the near future like join-pushdown, writable APIs and so on.
> If we would not have a FDW extension in core tha
2012/6/19 Merlin Moncure :
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>> I can't help but wonder (having been down the contrib/core/extension
>>> road myself) if it isn't better to improve the facilities to register
>>> and s
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> I can't help but wonder (having been down the contrib/core/extension
>> road myself) if it isn't better to improve the facilities to register
>> and search for qualified extensions (l
2012/6/18 Merlin Moncure :
> I can't help but wonder (having been down the contrib/core/extension
> road myself) if it isn't better to improve the facilities to register
> and search for qualified extensions (like Perl CPAN) so that people
> looking for code to improve their backends can find it.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I can't help but wonder (having been down the contrib/core/extension
> road myself) if it isn't better to improve the facilities to register
> and search for qualified extensions (like Perl CPAN) so that people
> looking for code to improve
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Shigeru HANADA
wrote:
> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL, as a contrib module
> in core, again. This patch is basically rebased version of the patches
> proposed in 9.2 development cycle, and contains some additional changes
> such as concern abou
25 matches
Mail list logo
