Obsolete comment in postgres_fdw.c

Started by Etsuro Fujitaabout 10 years ago4 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Etsuro Fujita
fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp

Hi,

Here is the comments for foreign_join_ok in postgres_fdw.c:

/*
* Assess whether the join between inner and outer relations can be
pushed down
* to the foreign server. As a side effect, save information we obtain
in this
* function to PgFdwRelationInfo passed in.
*
* Joins that satisfy conditions below are safe to push down.
*
* 1) Join type is INNER or OUTER (one of LEFT/RIGHT/FULL)
* 2) Both outer and inner portions are safe to push-down
* 3) All foreign tables in the join belong to the same foreign server
and use
* the same user mapping.
* 4) All join conditions are safe to push down
* 5) No relation has local filter (this can be relaxed for INNER JOIN,
if we
* can move unpushable clauses upwards in the join tree).
*/

The condition 3 is now checked by the core, so I'd like to remove that
condition from the above comments.

In addition, I'd like to update some related comments in
src/include/nodes/relation.h and src/backend/optimizer/path/joinpath.c.

Attached is a patch for that.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

Attachments:

update-umid-related-comments.patchapplication/x-patch; name=update-umid-related-comments.patchDownload+10-9
#2Ashutosh Bapat
ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com
In reply to: Etsuro Fujita (#1)
Re: Obsolete comment in postgres_fdw.c

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
wrote:

Hi,

Here is the comments for foreign_join_ok in postgres_fdw.c:

/*
* Assess whether the join between inner and outer relations can be
pushed down
* to the foreign server. As a side effect, save information we obtain
in this
* function to PgFdwRelationInfo passed in.
*
* Joins that satisfy conditions below are safe to push down.
*
* 1) Join type is INNER or OUTER (one of LEFT/RIGHT/FULL)
* 2) Both outer and inner portions are safe to push-down
* 3) All foreign tables in the join belong to the same foreign server
and use
* the same user mapping.
* 4) All join conditions are safe to push down
* 5) No relation has local filter (this can be relaxed for INNER JOIN,
if we
* can move unpushable clauses upwards in the join tree).
*/

The condition 3 is now checked by the core, so I'd like to remove that

condition from the above comments.

It was left there intentionally to document all the conditions in one place
(some from the core and some from the FDW itself), for a ready reference.
In case tomorrow core thinks that matching user mapping is not required,
postgres_fdw would still require it to be incorporated.

In addition, I'd like to update some related comments in
src/include/nodes/relation.h and src/backend/optimizer/path/joinpath.c.

Those look fine. Sorry for missing those in the commit and thanks for
providing a patch for the same.

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

#3Etsuro Fujita
fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Ashutosh Bapat (#2)
Re: Obsolete comment in postgres_fdw.c

On 2016/03/14 16:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp <mailto:fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>> wrote:

Here is the comments for foreign_join_ok in postgres_fdw.c:

/*
* Assess whether the join between inner and outer relations can be
pushed down
* to the foreign server. As a side effect, save information we obtain
in this
* function to PgFdwRelationInfo passed in.
*
* Joins that satisfy conditions below are safe to push down.
*
* 1) Join type is INNER or OUTER (one of LEFT/RIGHT/FULL)
* 2) Both outer and inner portions are safe to push-down
* 3) All foreign tables in the join belong to the same foreign server
and use
* the same user mapping.
* 4) All join conditions are safe to push down
* 5) No relation has local filter (this can be relaxed for INNER JOIN,
if we
* can move unpushable clauses upwards in the join tree).
*/

The condition 3 is now checked by the core, so I'd like to remove that
condition from the above comments.

It was left there intentionally to document all the conditions in one
place (some from the core and some from the FDW itself), for a ready
reference. In case tomorrow core thinks that matching user mapping is
not required, postgres_fdw would still require it to be incorporated.

Thank you for the explanation! I understand the reason, but that seems
confusing to me.

In addition, I'd like to update some related comments in
src/include/nodes/relation.h and src/backend/optimizer/path/joinpath.c.

Those look fine. Sorry for missing those in the commit and thanks for
providing a patch for the same.

No problem.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

#4Robert Haas
robertmhaas@gmail.com
In reply to: Etsuro Fujita (#3)
Re: Obsolete comment in postgres_fdw.c

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:31 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

It was left there intentionally to document all the conditions in one
place (some from the core and some from the FDW itself), for a ready
reference. In case tomorrow core thinks that matching user mapping is
not required, postgres_fdw would still require it to be incorporated.

Thank you for the explanation! I understand the reason, but that seems
confusing to me.

Agreed.

In addition, I'd like to update some related comments in
src/include/nodes/relation.h and
src/backend/optimizer/path/joinpath.c.

Those look fine. Sorry for missing those in the commit and thanks for
providing a patch for the same.

No problem.

Committed.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers