Re: join pushdown and issue with foreign update

Alexander Pyhalov  writes:
> What about the following patch?

ISTM that using a specific rowtype rather than RECORD would be
quite disastrous from the standpoint of bloating the number of
distinct resjunk columns we need for a partition tree with a
lot of children.  Maybe we'll have to go that way, but it seems
like an absolute last resort.

I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table's rowtype
during execution of the input operation, without touching the
plan as such.

Could we start by creating a test case that doesn't involve
uncommittable hacks to the source code?

			regards, tom lane